Found Deceased CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #40

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not sure why that would keep people from posting their thoughts and theories. In assuming CW killed his family, there have been posts suggesting some are speculating in order to fit their own theories, instead of being open to all possibilities. Yet that has not stopped the continual theories to support their beliefs. I think many would like to hear different theories, it definitely makes it more interesting and gives us something to consider. Many have asked for different views as to what evidence may support the theory that SW killed her children, yet, still, we have not had any. I for one, would very much like to understand. Maybe its just frustrating because people hint at the possibility but won't provide evidence or a reason why it makes sense. Jmo

Maybe some are reading things about SW on other sites that are not allowed to be discussed here. Maybe those things have convinced them CW may be telling the truth because we don't know the real SW. I think that's why it's been insinuated that we will be surprised at trial and hinted that there will be some kind of evidence against SW. I guess we shall see. I think it's just gossip but again, we shall see. I don't read FB or Instagram posts or anywhere other than here and the court documents so I can only go by the information I have. Regardless, nothing presented will take anything away from what CW has already said and done. I can think he's a and still be open to another theory for the children's murders if something can be proven.
 
Wow. This matches with my unprofessional theory that he had an annihilated personality and subsumed identity and thus annihilated his family rather than look like a bad guy to his family of origin by leaving a pregnant wife and two kids for some affair. It also goes with the simmering rage/resentment theory:

"What I've felt, what I've known
Never shined through in what I've shown
Never be, never see
Won't see what might have been
What I've felt, what I've known
Never shined through in what I've shown
Never free, never me
So I dub thee "Unforgiven""

https://www.google.com/amp/s/genius.com/amp/Metallica-the-unforgiven-lyrics
Wow. My favorite song by them. Lots of memories. The majority of their songs are a little heavy for me. But I will say that back in the nineties, when I knew people who were really into Metallica, they were the " bomb waiting to explode" type people. Kept everything inside yet were aggressive. Antisocial. I got dragged to a concert once, and I feared for my life. I was certain something was going to catch on fire. Jmo
 
Ignore feature recommended in general.

And a reason folks put others on ignore, is because some often post about stuff that has nothing to do with case, they focus on others vs. case.
I am under the impression we aren't supposed to discuss ignoring others in the threads, but I'm aware of the feature and how to use it, thank you. I'm also certain I'm allowed to respond to others, as long as it's respectful.
 
Right, but we won’t be trying the case. The People of the State of Colorado will try it.

Based on the evidence currently available, I’m confident CW will be convicted. I have read every single pleading publicly available on this case, and it doesn’t look good for CW.

When I was in law school, I interned for a judge who was presiding over a death penalty case. It was my first time sitting through a criminal trial from beginning to end. And let me tell you, I walked into that courtroom and naively thought, this is BS - this guy didn’t kill that girl. But, I sat and listened to all the testimony, and boy was the State right. Sentenced to death. I witnessed the judge overcome with grief prior to sentencing the defendant to death. He was ordering someone to be put to death. Man, never did I think about what that could do to a person.

I later when on to clerk for that same judge and worked on hundreds of motions for post-conviction relief, and sat through more criminal trials where I wrote numerous opinions. I reviewed every single detail. In the same manner I’ve reviewed everything in this case.

I believe in the criminal justice system and I respect the rights of each and every defendant. I also believe in the victim justice system (I just made that up by the way).

Basically, I’m not going to put on a blindfold and disregard the avalanche of evidence currently available against CW. I guess this is why it’s difficult for me to understand how others can.

All my professional and personal opinions.

Thank you. I wish we had a "love" button here.
 
Yeah, I have some problems with that whole study. People listen to music and digest it in different ways. Music is extremely subjective and what one person gets from it may not be what someone else does. I've always been into lyrics myself, but my husband is into the actual accompaniment. If you asked him what his favorite songs are, he could tell you their names but couldn't quote a single line. Sometimes artists, like Eminem, also write songs as satire and their lyrics aren't always meant to be taken at face value. Eminem is also known for writing lyrics that are provocative to intentionally bring light to subjects that people don't want to talk about. "Lose Yourself", as mentioned in that study, is a really good song about having ambition and rising above your situation to reach your goals and dreams. My favorite type of music is bluegrass and Appalachian folk and those songs are full of murder ballads. I don't like them for their subject matter, but because they tell linear stories. People have always enjoyed reading tragedies.

With that being said, it's definitely interesting to know CW's "likes" and the type of songs that continually come up as being favorites for psychopaths IS pretty fascinating.
I once told a guy on a blind date that I liked Eminem and I never heard from him again.
 
See, I just have to point out that when a post begins with an implication that people not of an opinion don't use logic, it's not conducive to a sincerely open-minded conversation.

Which is likely a big reason also that other theories haven't been laid out in the thread--there is a distinct lack of sincerity about really wanting to know why people have other theories--the motive seems to be less gaining understanding and more fight picking.

I respect everyone's right to have and express their own theory and believe we can learn from each other's differences and similarities. I currently believe that CW committed the crimes he's been charged with, but am willing to believe differently if more evidence shows differently.

I am still trying to understand others with different viewpoints, specifically, how does one choose what to believe what a proven liar like CW claims? How do you determine what to believe and what not to believe? I asked this earlier today in a previous post right after the thread opened for the day but haven't had anyone explain this. I sincerely want to know! I'm not trying to start an argument. I want to understand this. I would appreciate anyone with a differing viewpoint explaining this to me.
 
You’d make an excellent juror, Tippy!

Despite the fact I believe CW is guilty of all charges (based on the evidence we know so far), I believe each of you reserving judgment would make excellent jurors. This is what both sides want- a fair trial with unbiased opinions of the jurors. If everyone selected for jury service went into the trial believing he is guilty without hearing the evidence, that would not be a fair trial. I, personally, would not want a mistrial for the sake of family members, and the memory of the victims being tainted (or drug through the mud). As of now, I can't see a defense without this happening. It would be heartbreaking for all involved to go through this more than once.

I don't mind that any of you aren't willing to convict (yet), or the reasons why. It doesn't rile me up that you don't come to the same conclusion as most of us do. Makes for a great discussion!:D
 
While I believe most of what CW said were lies, I do believe there were some half truths spread out in them. For instance, like you I believe he killed his wife but not for the reasons he said he did. I believe he DID see his dead children through the monitor, but I believe it's because he'd already killed them. Etc. etc. You can definitely believe that CW is a liar while still acquiescing that there were bits of truth sprinkled without. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Right. I do not believe most people have surmised CW is a compulsive liar. I believe he is a selective liar when it benefits him, as he has shown repeatedly in this case. So in areas where he has a motive to lie to help himself, we believe he is doing exactly what he showed us he would do before his confession, lie to protect himself. He had a motive for admitting he killed his wife (motive being they found the location of the bodies at his work site and cadaver dogs showed those people were dead in the house) because he knew they would charge him with that. His lies about why he did it and about the kids are to cover his behind. He did not IMO admit to killing SW because he wanted to tell the truth - he did it because he was cornered and he was trying to mitigate the damage, and apparently still is to date.
 
A few days ago someone posted (I think it was a lawyer or law-knowledgeable poster) that defense counsel was most likely withdrawing CW's confession, or making motions to, whatever the legal language would be.

If that is true, then is the accusation agains SW also withdrawn, then reinserted later at the trial?

OK OK I know, I am really bad at the legal lingo, but would like to know the answer, if the confession is withdrawn, is the accusation against SW also withdrawn?
 
Despite the fact I believe CW is guilty of all charges (based on the evidence we know so far), I believe each of you reserving judgment would make excellent jurors. This is what both sides want- a fair trial with unbiased opinions of the jurors. If everyone selected for jury service went into the trial believing he is guilty without hearing the evidence, that would not be a fair trial. I, personally, would not want a mistrial for the sake of family members, and the memory of the victims being tainted (or drug through the mud). As of now, I can't see a defense without this happening. It would be heartbreaking for all involved to go through this more than once.

I don't mind that any of you aren't willing to convict (yet), or the reasons why. It doesn't rile me up that you don't come to the same conclusion as most of us do. Makes for a great discussion!:D
Same here. It's great to know what others are thinking and what the prosecution is up against. Just my opinion.:)
 
What songs are they? Interestingly a study came out recently that found that psychopaths like certain songs over others. They listed a couple but did not list most because the study continues and they don't want to influence people. Also, they say there are ethical issues to the study.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/how-spot-psychopath-music-taste-can-offer-clues-671459?amp=1
They were Three Days Grace “Bully” and a Metallica song that I can’t remember now, lol. Sorry.
 
So last night I sucked it up and read Nick van der Leek’s second “book” on this case, “TWO FACE: BENEATH THE OIL.”

After reading his first “book,” I had set a pretty low bar as far as expectations go. Amazingly, this one set the bar for the inevitable third book, right around ground level.

Imagine that one of us, someone intimately familiar with the case, was to take LSD and then attempt to write a book. It would likely be far more coherent, and relevant, than the pointless drivel that this guy just produced.

Considering this crime happened less than two months ago, and this guy is already profiting from it, this is literally capitalism at its worst.

But I digress.

Our esteemed, “best selling author,” opens once again with a premeditated scenario. Shanann returns home from her trip, and enters the house, where she is immediately attacked. He describes CW using Bella’s pillowcase to form a type of lasso (referring to ligature strangulation), which he uses to strangle her.

He moves on to discuss the area in which CW grew up, an economically downtrodden town in North Carolina. The point here, is to illustrate that he came from nothing.

The “author’ discusses identity, and how important it is to us. He describes his own “existential crisis,” and how a life coach convinced him to change careers and become an author (possibly the worst advice ever given to any person, in the history of humanity).

He recounts a phone call from a producer at HLN. Basically, she was sussing him out, trying to figure out what inside information he had and who his sources were (none and none).

He talks about how hopeful he was that this could lead to him being interviewed, and how that could positively affect his “book” sales. After the 20 minute phone conversation, in which the producer apparently took no notes (who would), she basically told him “thanks, but no thanks.”

He then attacks the Thayers, who had the gaul to leave a message on his blog page demanding he remove a photo that NT took, that appeared on the cover of the first book. He touches on the legalities of him doing so, and seems to hold a grudge against them for complaining.

I’m not going to go into it, but he devoted an inordinate amount of time discussing what he sees as similarities between the Watts’ and the Thayers (I genuinely hope they sue him).

He goes after Thrive again, going as far as to make the (ridiculous) assertion that Shanann’s Facebook page is still up, in order to promote the company.

He spends a good portion of the “book” on something relatively insignificant, that damn Santa video. He talks about how contrived it was, and how it is a contradiction of the image SW was trying to convey.

A recurring theme throughout, is the loss of CW’s identity in the shadow of Shanann, and how he killed his family in order to reclaim it.

The “author” makes a (rare) good point when he discusses CW’s chance of getting away with the crime, saying that the video evidence from his neighbor’s surveillance camera, all but guaranteed his discovery.

He raises the insane notion that CW grilling on the night in question, was an effort to hide unpleasant smells, possibly from chemicals. The assertion here is that the kids were already dead at this point.

He closes by discussing other cases, offers ridiculous ideas about symbolism, and delves into pointless discussion about Anadarko.

He adds: “If there is a silver linish shimmering somewhere on this giant oil cloud, it’s the fact that this case-grotesque as it is - also reveals the nature of the world to ourselves.” [How incredibly deep]

Some silver lining...

My silver lining lining is that I just wasted 45 minutes reading complete nonsense. And it’s over.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
175
Guests online
245
Total visitors
420

Forum statistics

Threads
608,881
Messages
18,247,077
Members
234,480
Latest member
Emma Riley
Back
Top