Found Deceased CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #24

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, when the reporter asks if he saw her when she got home, it seems as if he is trying to rush right by the question, so instead of having to elaborate or leaving it open so the reporter can ask something else, such as " did you talk to her? , he immediately mentions seeing his kids on the monitor. Then at one point he closes his eyes. Doesn't mention the "emotional conversation" at all. Maybe he added that part after he spoke to his dad. Jmo
BBM
Only if he communicated with his dad by phone, because he told LE about the emotional conversation Monday when they were at the house for the well-being check. His dad didn't arrive until Wednesday.
 
BBM
I tend to think that he killed her earlier than 4 or 5 am. Listen to what he says just after the 6 minute mark in this video:
"I saw her when she got in, but it was really quick."

CW used the word "nightmare" several times and seemed nervous and somewhat flat. I think what transpired is that: he saw SW briefly when she got in because he was asleep and heard her come in. CW got up and started his usual routine at 5 AM and that's when the emotional conversation took place.

I think CW was tired of Thrive dominating their family's life and said he wanted to separate. He may have said he was in love with someone else and Medea syndrome immediately kicked in with SW.

I intend to keep open the possibility CW is telling the truth about what happened until evidence is released that proves it untrue. JMO
 
Yes, I think this is one reason why these cases are so fascinating to people...because people want to believe there are signs. That it cannot happen to them. With the cases you mention, I do not believe we had the SM videos to see for ourselves family interactions. It was easier to say there should have been signs of lack of empathy.

I actually thought Scott Peterson reminded me of an ex of mine everyone loved but was as shallow as a sidewalk puddle. I guess I was just wondering does a crime and coverup ala Scott P or CW necessarily equate to a lack of the ability to empathize? The FBI profiler interviewed by one media outlet seemed to point to this with CW. He certainly came across as narcissistic in his media interviews as there was just so much emphasis on how them missing affected HIM...not what they might be going through. But do you have to be a sociopath/psychopath/or/narcissist to commit this crime? I am just curious. Do you have to have the ability to empathize damaged or nonexistent to murder a child? I was certainly not saying he might not have done it...just trying to wrap my mind around it. I have not studied it but it is interesting to me.

PS Rockstar job on the audio discussion you had the other day. What a prosecutor you would make!

I suspect that there is no universal type of a killer, but it is more about being able to physically remove someone you perceive as the obstacle. So they can demonstrate compassion if you are not out of their prey group.

Ted Bundy worked at Seattle Suicide Hotlline Criisis Center, meaning he could at least project empathy, and maybe truly felt it towards certain people.
 
Last edited:
When NUA dropped Shannan off at 1:48 am Sunday night/Monday am: is the safety latch/chain engaged on the front door?

I'm curious if CW has to let her in? If So, to me, it seems that would be an opportune time for an emotional convo. He's tired; she's tired, he has to get out of bed to let her in.

This may have already been covered. Apologies if a rehash of earlier convo.
 
CW used the word "nightmare" several times and seemed nervous and somewhat flat. I think what transpired is that: he saw SW briefly when she got in because he was asleep and heard her come in. CW got up and started his usual routine at 5 AM and that's when the emotional conversation took place.

I think CW was tired of Thrive dominating their family's life and said he wanted to separate. He may have said he was in love with someone else and Medea syndrome immediately kicked in with SW.

I intend to keep open the possibility CW is telling the truth about what happened until evidence is released that proves it untrue. JMO
It seems unlikely to me that 27 minutes would be enough time for three murders and getting the bodies into his truck. MOO
 
Yes, I think this is one reason why these cases are so fascinating to people...because people want to believe there are signs. That it cannot happen to them. With the cases you mention, I do not believe we had the SM videos to see for ourselves family interactions. It was easier to say there should have been signs of lack of empathy.

I actually thought Scott Peterson reminded me of an ex of mine everyone loved but was as shallow as a sidewalk puddle. I guess I was just wondering does a crime and coverup ala Scott P or CW necessarily equate to a lack of the ability to empathize? The FBI profiler interviewed by one media outlet seemed to point to this with CW. He certainly came across as narcissistic in his media interviews as there was just so much emphasis on how them missing affected HIM...not what they might be going through. But do you have to be a sociopath/psychopath/or/narcissist to commit this crime? I am just curious. Do you have to have the ability to empathize damaged or nonexistent to murder a child? I was certainly not saying he might not have done it...just trying to wrap my mind around it. I have not studied it but it is interesting to me.

PS Rockstar job on the audio discussion you had the other day. What a prosecutor you would make!
But wasn't there somewhat of a sign? Didn't NUA say that CW had become very distant with the girls about 3 weeks before the murders?
 
I'd like to elaborate a little more on the "emasculation" potential discussed last night. Shut down the pc and just read through posts and noticed the topic continued.

@Gitana 1 wrote: "Do you believe that saying on a public video "you're not being very helpful Chris", in an even tone like we heard in the video, not a nasty tone, not yelling, is "very emasculating"?"

Not all examples are as extreme as the "Boogie Nights" example you cited! And I certainly wasn't referring to just one comment in one video.

I encourage you to look up emasculation.

Emasculation is *not* just about sex or sexuality. It includes a variety of things, including the man feeling in control, having some power, feeling that his intelligence is respected, physical and emotional strength, having his opinions be respected, etc.

Various psychology sites state that emasculation can include: Pointing out his flaws, badmouthing him to friends, checking out in the bedroom, undermining him ("You did it wrong - never mind, I'll do it myself"), shaming him in public, scoffing at his salary, calling him a wimp ("he doesn't have game"), taking over arguments, pointing out his flaws ("he doesn't listen to me"). Some men feel emasculated the instant the wife starts earning more money than them.

IMO, and of course it's only based on her videos which is all we have to go by, she will praise CW when she's in a mood to do so and when he's not in the video.

When he participates in a video, it's all about the kids and what they're doing, and he's an accessory or puppet and had better do things right. I don't know if she did all of the above things that I quoted as examples, but she certainly did some of them in her very public videos. Yes, some of the videos and comments were harmless,
but when factored into the whole picture and combined together, along with some VI comments that we have, I stand by my opinion that this could *possibly* be part of the issue.

Perhaps those types of comments were few and far between, and perhaps not. None of us know.

A VI mentioned a few days back that she would put him down in public. That can really have a severe cumulative effect in someone's mind esp if the person is extremely sensitive. Some see ribbing and some internalize the hurt. See Trinket78's post #483: "He was verbally abused from the beginning."

Yes, that is VIs opinion, just as we are entitled to form our own opinions here, and just as other friends and family members have opinions, and the poor jury is going to have to weed through them.

And we have another VI opinion that SW didn't really put CW down, and in fact, only tended to boost people up.

BOTH of those opinions are valid and even accurate, because it is based on those people's interactions and experience with the parties involved.

Maybe the reason she puffed him up with her compliments in certain videos is because she DID berate him and he talked to her about it, so that was her way of apologizing, letting him know that she really didn't mean it and did love him, couldn't live without him, etc. Who knows.

It could have been a potential "snapping" trigger on that night. SW could have been so upset about the potential separation that she raged at him - "After all I've done for you! You were nothing when we met. Nothing. You dressed like an idiot. I encouraged you to take that job. You'd be nowhere without me." and so on... That could have been his last straw.

I believe I was the first poster to use the word “emasculate”
I'd like to elaborate a little more on the "emasculation" potential discussed last night. Shut down the pc and just read through posts and noticed the topic continued.

@Gitana 1 wrote: "Do you believe that saying on a public video "you're not being very helpful Chris", in an even tone like we heard in the video, not a nasty tone, not yelling, is "very emasculating"?"

Not all examples are as extreme as the "Boogie Nights" example you cited! And I certainly wasn't referring to just one comment in one video.

I encourage you to look up emasculation.

Emasculation is *not* just about sex or sexuality. It includes a variety of things, including the man feeling in control, having some power, feeling that his intelligence is respected, physical and emotional strength, having his opinions be respected, etc.

Various psychology sites state that emasculation can include: Pointing out his flaws, badmouthing him to friends, checking out in the bedroom, undermining him ("You did it wrong - never mind, I'll do it myself"), shaming him in public, scoffing at his salary, calling him a wimp ("he doesn't have game"), taking over arguments, pointing out his flaws ("he doesn't listen to me"). Some men feel emasculated the instant the wife starts earning more money than them.

IMO, and of course it's only based on her videos which is all we have to go by, she will praise CW when she's in a mood to do so and when he's not in the video.

When he participates in a video, it's all about the kids and what they're doing, and he's an accessory or puppet and had better do things right. I don't know if she did all of the above things that I quoted as examples, but she certainly did some of them in her very public videos. Yes, some of the videos and comments were harmless,
but when factored into the whole picture and combined together, along with some VI comments that we have, I stand by my opinion that this could *possibly* be part of the issue.

Perhaps those types of comments were few and far between, and perhaps not. None of us know.

A VI mentioned a few days back that she would put him down in public. That can really have a severe cumulative effect in someone's mind esp if the person is extremely sensitive. Some see ribbing and some internalize the hurt. See Trinket78's post #483: "He was verbally abused from the beginning."

Yes, that is VIs opinion, just as we are entitled to form our own opinions here, and just as other friends and family members have opinions, and the poor jury is going to have to weed through them.

And we have another VI opinion that SW didn't really put CW down, and in fact, only tended to boost people up.

BOTH of those opinions are valid and even accurate, because it is based on those people's interactions and experience with the parties involved.

Maybe the reason she puffed him up with her compliments in certain videos is because she DID berate him and he talked to her about it, so that was her way of apologizing, letting him know that she really didn't mean it and did love him, couldn't live without him, etc. Who knows.

It could have been a potential "snapping" trigger on that night. SW could have been so upset about the potential separation that she raged at him - "After all I've done for you! You were nothing when we met. Nothing. You dressed like an idiot. I encouraged you to take that job. You'd be nowhere without me." and so on... That could have been his last straw.

Great post! I believe I’m the first poster to use the word “emasculating” to describe SW’s comments in the video I posted of them playing checkers. It upset some people but it’s how I viewed it. I think if SW wasn’t a victim (and she most certainly is) more people would agree. It’s one thing to tease in private, quite another in such a hugely public way...live on FB. I’d call it a cautionary tale.
 
I suspect that there is no universal type of a killer, but it is more about being able to physically remove someone you perceive as the obstacle. Come to this conclusion. So they can demonstrate compassion if you are not out of their prey group.
Or sometimes they choose random victims for no reason at all other than convenienence.
 
Haaaa great points. MLM’s are a shady and dangerous business. They have a tendency to isolate people from their friends, if not ruin relationships outright.

These companies operate very much like a cult, and few people actually achieve success.

I don’t believe the family was in very good financial shape, and I doubt Thrive helped this.

Who knows if their financial troubles played into the motive, but they very well might have.
I agree and will unfollow friends on fb who post constantly about MLMs. Looking at SW’s Jan 2018 vision board I was surprised to see she had listed to pay off mortgage by 12/19. Makes me think they were making extra payments on their mortgage, but not sure. She also had be debt free in 2018, pay off cars and save $50k by May 2019.
 
When NUA dropped Shannan off at 1:48 am Sunday night/Monday am: is the safety latch/chain engaged on the front door?

I'm curious if CW has to let her in? If So, to me, it seems that would be an opportune time for an emotional convo. He's tired; she's tired, he has to get out of bed to let her in.

This may have already been covered. Apologies if a rehash of earlier convo.
NUA reportedly watched SW enter the home before she drove away, but I do not recall it said that SW had to wait for CW to unlock the door for her to enter.
 
CW used the word "nightmare" several times and seemed nervous and somewhat flat. I think what transpired is that: he saw SW briefly when she got in because he was asleep and heard her come in. CW got up and started his usual routine at 5 AM and that's when the emotional conversation took place.

I think CW was tired of Thrive dominating their family's life and said he wanted to separate. He may have said he was in love with someone else and Medea syndrome immediately kicked in with SW.

I intend to keep open the possibility CW is telling the truth about what happened until evidence is released that proves it untrue. JMO

With all due respect... and I mean that. HOW ON EARTH! Can you explain from your point of view and timeline that the monster had this emotional conversation and there was time for her to murder her babies, him to lose it and murder her, load up the bodies of those poor people and dump the babies in oil tanks and throw some dirt over his wife (per the affadavit, paraphrased). Nothing about this post makes sense to me. Does not even match his timeline. moo moo moo
 
I agree and will unfollow friends on fb who post constantly about MLMs. Looking at SW’s Jan 2018 vision board I was surprised to see she had listed to pay off mortgage by 12/19. Makes me think they were making extra payments on their mortgage, but not sure. She also had be debt free in 2018, pay off cars and save $50k by May 2019.
That’s very interesting, but doesn’t sound realistic. We’d need to have a clearer picture of their financial situation to make that determination, but I’m extremely skeptical.
 
DIGGING GRAVES IS HARDER THAN YOU WOULD THINK

My wife's dog died last night, and she and I had to dig a grave to bury it this morning. We live in Colorado. Our yard is sandy and rocky and dry, with natural grasses, yucca plants, and cactus, probably very much like the terrain where CW buried SW "in a shallow grave."

It took my wife and I an hour-and-a-half to dig a hole that was about 3 feet long by 2.5 feet wide by 2 feet deep with a pick axe and a shovel. We would have preferred for it to be deeper, but it would have taken an hour to get another 6 inches deep, the ground was so hard. Then when we got the dog in there, it took longer than you'd think to fill the hole back up with dirt.

This leads me to believe that if CW intended to bury all three bodies, he soon found that it would be an impossible task and would have taken all day, despite the fact that he is fairly young and in better shape than me.

Putting the girls in the oil tanks may have been out of necessity, especially if he was trying to dig graves when his Ring doorbell notification alerted him that NU had arrived at the home. He may have intended to come back later, with the CW's purse, cell phone, and belongings to finish the burying.

Edited for typo and clarification.
I don’t want to repeat but I wanted to say I live in northern CO and the ground in this state is mostly clay. You have a foot maybe. And I mean maybe of loose soil and then clay. My uncle was a soil tester for the state and I have included a link to northern Colorado soil testing (however I’m not that learned in understanding the results). But I can say that the soil here is really hard. Soil Surveys by State | NRCS Soils
 
Maybe he felt he wouldn’t be believed ...

I'm trying my best to be open minded because we don't have all the facts, mostly speculation and opinions.

IF, and only IF, it happened as CW said: I would understand if he ONLY disposed of SW body because he killed her;
but WHY disposed of the babies bodies in such a repugnant way? when, allegedly they were strangled by SW?

why keeping the charade ? why bargain to disclose the babies lifeless bodies location?
 
Then, maybe they should call it "abnormal manhood anxiety" which means he's the one with the problem, instead of calling it "emasculation" which certainly points the blame at the woman. OK, back to the potato field.

THANK YOU... If a man , hearing his wife say quietly, 'you're not helping Chris' , or hears her giving him instructions when he is playing Santa, takes it so seriously and defensively, that it feel emasculating, then he is the one with the problem, not her.

I haven't seen one thing on those videos which point to her 'emasculating' him. A bit bossy, for sure. But she is also effusive with her praise. So we cant have it both ways.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
173
Guests online
2,444
Total visitors
2,617

Forum statistics

Threads
599,702
Messages
18,098,409
Members
230,908
Latest member
Houndgirl2003
Back
Top