GUILTY CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *CW LWOP* #62

[Tortoise]

Well, one question is, if there were very private photos, how could one be sure they would not end up in public domain?

This is something that I would like to know. If she were more helpful...would the police protect her privacy more?

Because - much as she is not likable - there is no law against making private photos, sending nudes. And yet later it might spoil someone's life. Not only now. Imagine her getting married and have kids. And their young mom's nudes are in public domain?

I think if you allow yourself to be photographed naked and send it to another device, you always run that risk that someone else will be shown it and it will not be under your control - for the rest of your life. She wasn't naive 15.

 

[Steelhead]

I can't remember what video it was in, but before they confronted CW, Agent Tammy asks CW if they find SW and the girls murdered, what does he think should happen to the person who did it.

And he gives a cold, clinical, non-emotional answer that then they should get the death penalty or if Colorado doesn't really do that, then life in prison. But no emotion or anger like how he would want them dead or suffer or what he would want to do to the person who did this to his family.

Which of course he didn't have that emotion because he is the guilty one! But even more was telling that if he was going to blame this on SW, he should have been all, "I would want to do to them the exact thing they did to my daughters, those were my kids."

My favorite part of the polygraph video is when awesome Tammy says, "Wow, the good news is, you are a horrible liar! Has anyone ever told you that? That was awesome. If you lie it will be really easy to tell!"

And I loved the part when he was asked to list all the ways a person could cause someone's disappearance through murder. He mentions a few, but doesn't list strangling or smothering. Imagine that!

Discovery page 597:
"I explained to CHRIS that a person could physically cause another person’s disappearance by murdering
them. CHRIS agreed with my statement. I asked CHRIS to list all the physical ways a person could cause
someone’s disappearance through murder. CHRIS stated, “Stab someone, shoot someone, hit em’ with a
blunt object, um, what else is there, I mean, use a weapon of like a gun or a knife.” CHRIS appeared to be
thinking so I said, “You could smother someone.” CHRIS repeated what I said and I immediately said, “You
could strangle someone.” CHRIS said, “You could hang some—…yea, you can –all that kind of things…I
mean, it’s hard to even think about that kind of stuff right now.” I continued with telling CHRIS a person could
drown, shock, or burn someone to death. I asked CHRIS if he could think of any other ways to murder
someone and he said, “Lure them into a trap…I guess.” I asked CHRIS to explain and he said you could
have someone waiting around the corner and an accident could happen, such as getting hit by a car. I told
CHRIS that a person could kidnap another person and he agreed and said someone could take a person
somewhere and torture them and leave them without food or water. CHRIS then stated that a person could
poison another person or beat them to death as a way to make them disappear. I asked CHRIS if he would
have an issue with that question on the test and he said he could definitely pass that question."

 

[zea mays]

I don't recall it was alcohol but "substance abuse." Maybe I'm wrong?...

Correct. “Substance abuse” page 581.

You are correct that he didn't specifically say alcohol, I wasn't very precise when I said that, I apologize.

The relevant part of the pre-polygrah interview is in Part 2 at 29:40. She said "drug or alcohol abuse" and he responded "my Dad struggled with that...".

Remember when he gave the agents the song and dance about who was with him at the game on Saturday night? And then later he said he lied, and was with "her". Had they already talked to nk yet? I know they said they knew her name.

I think they had. Graham said something in the interview after the polygraph about knowing about the affair, CW protested to not get "her" involved, and later Graham dropped the name "Nikki" and you can almost see CW flinch a bit. It seemed a deliberate way to question him about her - to see what CW would reveal on his own, but then drop her name to imply they knew everything. So, I think they had had at least that initial interview with her at that point.

 

[zea mays]

And I loved the part when he was asked to list all the ways a person could cause someone's disappearance through murder. He mentions a few, but doesn't list strangling or smothering. Imagine that!

Discovery page 597:
"I explained to CHRIS that a person could physically cause another person’s disappearance by murdering
them. CHRIS agreed with my statement. I asked CHRIS to list all the physical ways a person could cause
someone’s disappearance through murder. CHRIS stated, “Stab someone, shoot someone, hit em’ with a
blunt object, um, what else is there, I mean, use a weapon of like a gun or a knife.” CHRIS appeared to be
thinking so I said, “You could smother someone.” CHRIS repeated what I said and I immediately said, “You
could strangle someone.” CHRIS said, “You could hang some—…yea, you can –all that kind of things…I
mean, it’s hard to even think about that kind of stuff right now.” I continued with telling CHRIS a person could
drown, shock, or burn someone to death. I asked CHRIS if he could think of any other ways to murder
someone and he said, “Lure them into a trap…I guess.” I asked CHRIS to explain and he said you could
have someone waiting around the corner and an accident could happen, such as getting hit by a car. I told
CHRIS that a person could kidnap another person and he agreed and said someone could take a person
somewhere and torture them and leave them without food or water. CHRIS then stated that a person could
poison another person or beat them to death as a way to make them disappear. I asked CHRIS if he would
have an issue with that question on the test and he said he could definitely pass that question."

If anyone wants to see this part of the pre-polygraph interview it's in Part 4 around 50:40

 

[katie565]

I have wondered the same thing. If by some miracle, NUA and SW came home at 2 am, picked up the girls, and left CW, how what it have changed things.

If SW moved the girls back to NC, and had Nico, and they separated...then what?

I wouldn't be surprised if CW would have gotten sick of NK, and the way she tried to take over and control him, even more so than SW.

And he'd possibly be fascinated by his son, and may have wanted to go back to his family?

Couldas, shouldas, wouldas - if only she knew what we all know now

 

[curiouschat]

I think if you allow yourself to be photographed naked and send it to another device, you always run that risk that someone else will be shown it and it will not be under your control - for the rest of your life. She wasn't naive 15.

I mean there's a lot of things that may put someone at risk for an increased chance of some kind of violation, like going out and getting wasted, but that does not make it ok to violate them. And here we have it done by authorities instead of for instance, an angry ex blasting pics on revenge *advertiser censored* sites. I find it disturbing either way. (And I am perfectly willing to speculate that she may have had more of a part in the murders than we know right now, but I also think it's very possible she didn't. And I really hate corrective shaming of women for being too indiscreet)

 

[Iamlysaloo]

Can anyone explain to me how he smothered the children? I always asssumed he used a pillow but that seems to have been ruled out by autopsy showing no fibers. If he used his hands, wouldn’t his hands have bite marks especially from the child who struggled? This is bad enough without him actually using bare hands. I can’t even

Maybe trash bags like the one in the picture over the doll?

 

[zea mays]

I mean there's a lot of things that may put someone at risk for an increased chance of some kind of violation, like going out and getting wasted, but that does not make it ok to violate them. And here we have it done by authorities instead of for instance, an angry ex blasting pics on revenge *advertiser censored* sites. I find it disturbing either way. (And I am perfectly willing to speculate that she may have had more of a part in the murders than we know right now, but I also think it's very possible she didn't. And I really hate corrective shaming of women for being too indiscreet)

Did they release the naked photos? I didn't see any nudes. The only "racy" photo I saw was NK in a skimpy-ish bathing suit posing in a bathroom? Presumably something she actually has or would wear to the beach?

I agree that the police releasing actual nude photos would be inappropriate.

 

[Charlot123]

But how much did she really hamper the investigation? I thought he might have been annoyed with her for speaking to the press, trying to do damage control before the final sentencing. I was.
And please don’t say I think you’re a bunch of meanies. This isn’t personal. We’re just talking it out.

For one, if the detectives did not know about her, there'd be no motive. It might have gone to trial, with unpredictable results.

 

[Loveallmyhorsesdogsandcats]

Well, one question is, if there were very private photos, how could one be sure they would not end up in public domain?

This is something that I would like to know. If she were more helpful...would the police protect her privacy more?

Because - much as she is not likable - there is no law against making private photos, sending nudes. And yet later it might spoil someone's life. Not only now. Imagine her getting married and have kids. And their young mom's nudes are in public domain?

No one said she broke any laws by making private photos. I do not care what kind of private photos anyone makes. To my knowledge only the one bathroom picture has been released so I am not sure what other pictures you are referring to and implying the police are not protecting her privacy.

 

[Thepoet]

I have wondered the same thing. If by some miracle, NUA and SW came home at 2 am, picked up the girls, and left CW, how what it have changed things.

If SW moved the girls back to NC, and had Nico, and they separated...then what?

I wouldn't be surprised if CW would have gotten sick of NK, and the way she tried to take over and control him, even more so than SW.

And he'd possibly be fascinated by his son, and may have wanted to go back to his family?

Or something would have set him off and he would have murdered NK! He was a timebomb! IMHO.

 

[kjpaw]

I call BS that she didn't enter the bedrooms. What was she doing in the loft - what was she doing in the house to begin with? That is kind of stalker-like if you ask me, gaining an advantage over Shanann by being in Shanann's home, and eating Shanann's food at Shanann's dinner table.

I'd be surprised if she didn't take a souvenir.

She knew there was a tv in there somehow....

 

[katie565]

I don’t think the secret calculator is a messaging app. You can hide pictures there in the vault. Not sure if they used other messenger apps but I think the calculator was just for picture storage for Chris.

I thought I read that you could send messages and even make phone calls. Am I wrong? @MassGuy

 

[Tippy Lynn]

Or something would have set him off and he would have murdered NK! He was a timebomb! IMHO.

I think so too. If NK would have threatened to tell SW about the affair things could have gone in a completely different direction.
jmo

 

[Loveallmyhorsesdogsandcats]

I mean there's a lot of things that may put someone at risk for an increased chance of some kind of violation, like going out and getting wasted, but that does not make it ok to violate them. And here we have it done by authorities instead of for instance, an angry ex blasting pics on revenge *advertiser censored* sites. I find it disturbing either way. (And I am perfectly willing to speculate that she may have had more of a part in the murders than we know right now, but I also think it's very possible she didn't. And I really hate corrective shaming of women for being too indiscreet)

Some keep referring to these nude pictures as if the police released them and to my knowledge they have not. I have only seen the one of her posing in lingerie in the bathroom.

 

[molly1255]

I mean there's a lot of things that may put someone at risk for an increased chance of some kind of violation, like going out and getting wasted, but that does not make it ok to violate them. And here we have it done by authorities instead of for instance, an angry ex blasting pics on revenge *advertiser censored* sites. I find it disturbing either way. (And I am perfectly willing to speculate that she may have had more of a part in the murders than we know right now, but I also think it's very possible she didn't. And I really hate corrective shaming of women for being too indiscreet)

Sorry, but I'm not seeing indiscreet as being the problem.

 

[MassGuy]

I mean there's a lot of things that may put someone at risk for an increased chance of some kind of violation, like going out and getting wasted, but that does not make it ok to violate them. And here we have it done by authorities instead of for instance, an angry ex blasting pics on revenge *advertiser censored* sites. I find it disturbing either way. (And I am perfectly willing to speculate that she may have had more of a part in the murders than we know right now, but I also think it's very possible she didn't. And I really hate corrective shaming of women for being too indiscreet)

The affair was likely a motive for murder. Everything related to that affair, is important.

This isn’t about “shaming,” it is evidence involving a mass murder.

A murder investigation is more important than this woman’s reputation.

I don’t think any lines were crossed.

 

[MassGuy]

Everyone keeps referring to these nude pictures as if the police released them and to my knowledge they have not. I have only seen the one of her posing in lingerie in the bathroom.

In the background of that particular photo you can see the person who took it.

Looks a lot like CW to me.

 

[Charlot123]

Did they release the naked photos? I didn't see any nudes. The only "racy" photo I saw was NK in a skimpy-ish bathing suit posing in a bathroom? Presumably something she actually has or would wear to the beach?

I agree that the police releasing actual nude photos would be inappropriate.

No they did not. But in the interview - when they asked her to give them her phone, she seemed not too trusting that they would keep her privacy?

This is what I mean - and it is not about her, it is about how much ends up in public access as the result of all the court proceedings?

 

[Curious.1]

I find it interesting, people previously (and some still) defending NK's actions because she's "young". Thirty shouldn't be considered an immature age IMO. By 30, most people have been working (paid or unpaid i.e. raising children) anywhere from 8 to 14 years, depending on further education. Previous generations of women without access to birth control and/or further education or careers would have had many, many children by 30, all being well with fertility. Where on earth, literally, is a 30 year old not expected to know right from wrong or know that laughing during a missing persons/murder enquiry is inappropriate? She has problems, but not from a lack of time on this earth IMO.