Found Deceased CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #29

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I haven't seen any signs that either one of them were being abused prior to the murders, except that he was cheating on her with at least one person and maybe more.
@FlossyMay, I agree on principal with you that I don't think there were any overt signs of abuse prior to the murders according to some of SW and CW friends and through SM presence but we have to take into account that (in part) an emotionally abusive relationship is one in which a partner undercuts a person's foundational self confidence and love of self and replaces it with confusion about self worth and value. It doesn't have to be overt abuse it can also be masked and imperceptible.
Not implying SW was abusive to CW just making a distinction about abuse can be overt and/or concealed
 
Idk, it's possible he didn't intervene because he didn't want to face the wrath. I didn't see anything with him initiating roughness or impatience with the kids. IMO
Then he was a neglectful parent if that is true. Remember how critical we all are when a woman allows a boyfriend to harm their child?
 
IMO, CW is completely void of any emotion, good or bad. It’s as if he has gone through life merely existing, not being cruel or mean to others, just not caring about forming attachments with other people. I don’t see him as a narcissist or psychopath, just empty. He’s been described as shy, quiet, studious, serious, etc. but nothing about being aggressive, cruel, impulsive, spiteful, or mean.

Where are his friends from childhood, parents of childhood friends, school friends, and neighbors growing up? I know labeling him one way or another doesn’t matter now but I’m struggling with the “why”.
He strikes me as hollow. A straw man going through the motions of being a loving dad and husband, the act of being a normal HUMAN.
 
I agree. Wholeheartedly with the not only allowance but right to express different views from the norm.

But I haven't yet seen an expression of an explanation or theory for why CW would find Bella. And CeCe strangled, actually witness it, and not call 911.

I have not yet seen an expression of an explanation or theory for why CW would instead strangle and murder Shanann and unborn Nico.

I have not yet seen an expression of an explanation or theory for why CW would then put the dead bodies of his family in the back of his truck, dump CeCe and Bella in oil tanks and throw dirt over Shanann and Nico.

Then give that porch interview.

All I've had access to is what CW himself has presented and confessed to.

JMO
I understand that, but I too am mindful of the families distress and my working theory is not something I would express in public as it doesn't put SW in a very favourable light.
 
Here's the thing: In general, men have a power position over women. There is a looooong history of men having property rights over women's property, and women having none, the power to vote while women did not, the ability to put a woman in a mental hospital without justification, take her children from her, leave her penniless, control her daily life and be supported in that by his family, her family, the churches and the courts, and even to commit domestic violence against her repeatedly, and just be told to take a walk to "cool down", or to have the wife be told not to anger him and to simply be sweet.

Those attitudes continue in many subcultures in the US today.

As a result of this long history and the resultant feminist movement, there was a shift in social attitudes that deemed certain things appropriate while others were not.

Popular culture evidences the shift. Especially t.v. and film.

So we go from the early to mid-fifties I Love Lucy episodes where she says "yes sir" to her husband, he threatens her with physical violence, and actually uses it, spanking her in at least on episode.

Then we see the slight change to the late 60's, the Brady Bunch. The couple represents more of a team now, working on decisions together (with that happening more strongly toward the middle and end of the series).

Go to the 70's and you see single, working women for really the first time (Mary Tyler Moore).

This changes again in the late 90's, early 00's. As with many things, the shift, in order to definitively and decisively divorce itself from a history of a male-dominated patriarchy in which wife beating was not great but not criminalized, etc., went the other way a bit.

So you get programs like 7th heaven, where the wife is constantly scolding and lecturing her husband, and King of Queens, in which Leah Remini's character is described as: "Doug's sardonic wife. She has a quick-temper and is occasionally physically abusive to Doug. She has been characterized as scary by Holly and Doug, particularly when she is angry. During a flashback, Carrie concludes that she is happier (she describes herself as never being truly happy) when others are miserable. She never finished college and is employed as a hard-working legal secretary. Her constant attempts to make her relationship with Doug more romantic and meaningful cause Doug frustration, as he prefers a simple life with as few restrictions as possible. The more quick-witted and adventurous of the couple, Carrie often pushes Doug to make more of himself and improve his morals, but she can be just as immoral as he is. Although Carrie scolds Doug for his selfish behavior, she has proven to be selfish as well at times, with little patience for others' problems or tolerance for their quirks."
The King of Queens - Wikipedia

This is all part of attempts to stabilize roles and sort of fix certain historic and social imbalances of power between the sexes.

(My BA is in American Studies BTW, so I happen to know a bit about American social history, etc.).

I represent a lot of men for some reason. Dads love me. So I am well aware that men are also victims of domestic violence and can be manipulated and victimized by women. I was particularly disgusted by the idea, during the jodi arias trial, that Travis was not a victim of domestic violence.

But it remains true that women continue to suffer more of DV than men, and that men cause more damage, statistically, when they commit it, than women. Women continue to represent 94% of all the intimate partner homicides in the nation.

So there is a more visceral, instinctive reaction when people hear a man badgering a woman, teasing her, or publicly criticizing her, than when a woman does so. It tends, socially, to represent something more profound - an imbalance of power that continues to exist, despite the attempts society has made to repair that imbalance.

In the past, like the Victorian era, a woman who disagreed with her husband in public, just an opinion about literature or politics, was seen as way out of line, unfeminine and shrewish. Today, it is frankly socially acceptable for the most part for women to complain publicly about hapless husbands, husbands who won't pick up after themselves, don't know how to shop, allow the kids to eat forbidden things and make a mess and do "dangerous" things, who fart, and don't groom enough, etc. It's part of popular culture.

So no, it is not the same. The whole history of the imbalance of power between men and women make that so. (Even though some in society continue to cling to notions of femininity from the past - A woman must always be sweet and nurturing and protective and babying of her kids, for example, and must never criticize or tease her husband, etc).

Finally, man or woman - I will never and have never accepted the defense that a parent was controlled and abused by another parent and thus was unable to protect their children from harm, unless they are actually chained or a firearm is used. Casting CW as "subservient" and "passive" is a way of excusing his potential perceived inadequacies as a parent - his inaction or participation in events on video that many here apparently feel evidence child neglect or abuse - and absolve him from his responsibility as a parent, while continuing to enable SW to be eviscerated as an abusive, neglectful and cruel parent, for the events HE also participated in, IMO.

I think that is why the whole topic of toxic masculinity is coming out. We have taught our boys well.

Boys do not cry. Be a man. At least we are looking at this so that boys may grow up to be men who do not have to to power plays.

I don’t think he went up against SW. We have seen over and over again on WS how women stand by while their children are abused especially sexually abused by their partner.

People fear the loss of “love “or whatever it is. So they simply do not speak out.

Hopefully things will change for both men and women.
 
I understand that, but I too am mindful of the families distress and my working theory is not something I would express in public as it doesn't put SW in a very favourable light.
You should put your theory out there. And let folks debate. I would hope everyone here has an open mind.

Edited to add based on evidence
 
That would mean that the prosecution motion is a lie (no chance). In that document, it states the reason they want that footprint, and it has to do with the bag.
This whole case is crazy and quite a mystery. Maybe he put the bag over SW head to shut her up, secured it with a rope or similar tied around her neck, suffocated her and stepped on her face with his bare foot. He was obviously evil or out of his mind or both when he killed his family so who knows? And yes I’m in the he killed the entire family camp and I believe the girls were first.
 
This whole case is crazy and quite a mystery. Maybe he put the bag over SW head to shut her up, secured it with a rope or similar tied around her neck, suffocated her and stepped on her face with his bare foot. He was obviously evil or out of his mind or both when he killed his family so who knows? And yes I’m in the he killed the entire family camp and I believe the girls were first.
I think he used a simple chokehold to kill her. I not only hope that your scenario isn’t true, I think it would have been extremely difficult versus other alternatives. Anything is possible though.
 
I guess I don't see anger as a negative emotion. I see it as a normal response to some life situations. Maybe that's just me though?

I get angry about many cases I see here. I get angry when I read about some of our suspects---having pages and pages of prior arrests, charges, and they are running free, able to assault or kill more victims.

I get angry when my neighbor lets her dogs come and do their business on my front lawn. She has a lawn, let them go there instead! I was so angry last week--I wanted to toss a handful over the fence on their patio---but I didn't...lol

Being angry is a normal emotion, in my opinion. JMO MOO

Anger is considered to be a secondary emotion, It is based on other emotions such as fear.
 
I think he used a simple chokehold to kill her. I not only hope that your scenario isn’t true, I think it would have been extremely difficult versus other alternatives. Anything is possible though.
Hopefully he wasn't practicing on the alleged AP who allegedly said he tried to strangle her during intercourse. MOO.
 
I am still trying to understand how he was 'belittled.' I watched the Santa tape again. She was directing the video so she told Santa where to sit and what was going on, so they could make the video. I didn't see it as belittling.

He was supposed to come back in as Santa, and bring the phone, to take pix with. He left it on the car in the garage. MISTAKE on his part. So as she is still live streaming, she says, with a big smile, obviously joking, 'he doesn't listen' grumble grumble...., is that seriously considered 'belittling' someone?

I think my husband listens to about half of what I say to him, and I tell him that too, but he doesn't feel belittled by that...he is proud of it, lol... he tells me that after 37 yrs, I'm lucky he listens to half...

I don't consider that belittling at all. I think the problem comes when some people watch the videos, decide that SW is doing something wrong, and then repeat it as fact. In actuality, her parenting skills, her attitude towards her husband, etc. is all subjective. We really can't say, "SW was rude to her husband" and repeat it as fact when that supposed rudeness is totally subjective.

My husband and I make fun of each other in public all the time. I don't get offended because I can dish it out as much as I take it. It's fun. We've said far worse to each other than what SW said to CW in any of those videos. If my husband stopped, I'd be kind of hurt. It's one of our "things."

And I am one of those parents who made screaming children sit on Santa's lap so that I could take a picture. My kids love those pictures now-they show their friends and laugh. I have one of me at 2 screaming at the Easter Bunny. It didn't scar me. In fact, it's framed and on my bedroom wall.
 
But how does abuse relate to this case? (I mean, other than the murders, of course.) Who was abused?

The children were abused by being forced to sit on Santa's lap, and having water squirted in a water fight, and having whip creme/pie fight. And Chris was abused by his wife, because she bossed him around and made fun of his clothing when they first met, and made fun of him for losing a checkers game...
 
Other than the fact that he was lying to her and having an ongoing affair, while she was pregnant with a child he agreed to have.

Thanks for pointing that out to me. I will take full ownership of my mistake because I fully agree that is abuse. I completely overlooked that while trying to get my point across in my post. {on the shame}
jmo
 
I think he used a simple chokehold to kill her. I not only hope that your scenario isn’t true, I think it would have been extremely difficult versus other alternatives. Anything is possible though.
I think so too but I didn’t want to completely dismiss what the other poster put out there. I think we all have a shot with our ideas. Did DA say if that bag with footprint was found at the disposal location? I’m too freaking tired I just got home from a long day at work. Exhausted!
 
Our VI said she had never even seen him get angry. That was a red flag for me.

An ex boyfriend of mine used to brag that he and his ex "never fought." I remember thinking at the time that if they never fought, it meant that someone was keeping something to themselves. Sure enough, after the broke up, the ex was all over town complaining about how awful he was and all the crummy things he had done. He was shocked, but I wasn't.
 
The children were abused by being forced to sit on Santa's lap, and having water squirted in a water fight, and having whip creme/pie fight. And Chris was abused by his wife, because she bossed him around and made fun of his clothing when they first met, and made fun of him for losing a checkers game...
Oh for cryin' out loud. Do we need to bring in a psychologist to define abuse or something? I will go find one! MOO
 
I think so too but I didn’t want to completely dismiss what the other poster put out there. I think we all have a shot with our ideas. Did DA say if that bag with footprint was found at the disposal location? I’m too freaking tired I just got home from a long day at work. Exhausted!
Yes. The document said that a latent footprint was found on a bag at the dump site.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
71
Guests online
1,492
Total visitors
1,563

Forum statistics

Threads
606,567
Messages
18,206,105
Members
233,887
Latest member
MandyLynn1109
Back
Top