GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #1

[Legally Bland]

But was he the main beneficiary?

If the Mail's use of the word 'fortune' is a direct substitute for the word 'estate', then I'd expect the £4m to include the value of her properties.

So IS would get pretty much all of it by my maths.

ETA, sorry mrjitty, was using quick post and viewed posts in wrong order.

 

[mrjitty]

Even though in retrospect, IS looks like a complete idiot, you can see how close he came to getting away with this.

In several cases I have studied, the murderer just got plain lucky that the body was not discovered - sometimes for many years - even though it was not that well hidden.

What seems odd, is why on earth he chose to hide the body on the property as that obviously incriminated him directly.

This make me wonder again if he intended to kill her at a different time and location.

Or maybe he was just so dumb he didn't realise there would be a detailed search?

 

[Satchie]

Except to lose one wife to a sudden, unexplained death is a tragedy, but to lose two is a different story.

Quoting Lady Bracknel with a dark irony I hope Helen would appreciate: "to lose both looks like carelessness"

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[michelle230]

Quoting Lady Bracknel with a dark irony I hope Helen would appreciate: "to lose both looks like carelessness"

Indeed Satchie!

 

[Alyce]

If IS misunderstood POA it could be that he thought having it would override her will. So having her missing meant he could access ALL of her money rather than only receiving part of it if she died.

I think he was miffed she was leaving money to other people rather than him getting it all and began drugging her as a result.

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

I think he might actually have been getting everything

Early msm reports said Helen was worth £4 million plus the properties.

But all the subsequent reports say her estate was worth £4,000.000

If the latter is correct, then I calculate it as;

The properties at current values are
Royston £1.7 million
Broadfields £330,000
Gateshead £185,000
Total £2.2 million

The cash amount in the Will to IS is £1.8 million

So I would say he gets the lot. I suppose there may be a few, very small, legacies to relatives, friends, but cant be much that he isnt getting his hands on ( or was )

 

[Alyce]

Do we know this?

Was he named in her will?

I see this was discussed in opening. I wonder what he stood to gain?

See post 2205

 

[michelle230]

Even though in retrospect, IS looks like a complete idiot, you can see how close he came to getting away with this.

In several cases I have studied, the murderer just got plain lucky that the body was not discovered - sometimes for many years - even though it was not that well hidden.

What seems odd, is why on earth he chose to hide the body on the property as that obviously incriminated him directly.

This make me wonder again if he intended to kill her at a different time and location.

Or maybe he was just so dumb he didn't realise there would be a detailed search?

Do you really think he would have got away with it if the body hadn`t been found?

Don`t you think that there was enough other evidence, and in view of his history, although the police most certainly would have had to work a bit harder, they would have got him in the end? I would like to think that. It`s too terrible to contemplate otherwise.
I agree about the stupidity of hiding Helen where he did, but to have done otherwise would have brought many other risks.

 

[michelle230]

I think he might actually have been getting everything

Early msm reports said Helen was worth £4 million plus the properties.

But all the subsequent reports say her estate was worth £4,000.000

If the latter is correct, then I calculate it as;

The properties at current values are
Royston £1.7 million
Broadfields £330,000
Gateshead £185,000
Total £2.2 million

The cash amount in the Will to IS is £1.8 million

So I would say he gets the lot. I suppose there may be a few, very small, legacies to relatives, friends, but cant be much that he isnt getting his hands on ( or was )

That`s why I thought from the start that it was important to meet a woman without children.

 

[Alyce]

Even though in retrospect, IS looks like a complete idiot, you can see how close he came to getting away with this.

In several cases I have studied, the murderer just got plain lucky that the body was not discovered - sometimes for many years - even though it was not that well hidden.

What seems odd, is why on earth he chose to hide the body on the property as that obviously incriminated him directly.

This make me wonder again if he intended to kill her at a different time and location.

Or maybe he was just so dumb he didn't realise there would be a detailed search?

BIB He thought it was the safest place. He knew where she was, he didnt think it would ever be searched and he had the peace of mind of knowing that he wasnt going to wake up one day and hear that a man and his dog had found some remains in a field or woods or similar.

Either that or ......and I lean towards this idea also ..........he had not planned to kill her on that day and so had to improvise over whatever his original plan had been. Lesser of two evils ( literally in his case ) was to put her in the tank, rather than have to put her in the car, drive somewhere and then dig a grave or find some other suitable burial site.

 

[michelle230]

I think the words used to describe IS`s inability to attend court today is very telling indeed.

 

[Legally Bland]

I think the words used to describe IS`s inability to attend court today is very telling indeed.

Related to the possible DRR, a mental health issue, or something else?

Reality setting in, maybe?

 

[michelle230]

Related to the possible DRR, a mental health issue, or something else?

Reality setting in, maybe?

I think reality has been growing for quite some time and reaching screaming level. Remember he has been in custody for a good while, left to stew in his own poison, and I`m sure that even his defence counsel has alluded to the hopelessness of the defence.

 

[Tortoise]

Seems to be Pistorius all over again. Controlling people today. That's what I think. He's running short of options now.

 

[Joely 123]

I am leaning towards him NOT planning the day of 11th April - but events overtook him in some way. And I go back to my thought of Helen being 'unconscious' with drugs and he jumped into action, after his designed plan.

I do believe he planned for her to die - perhaps by accident, as others have said, but something happened on the morning where he had gone beyond the design of his plan and he had to act swiftly. Perhaps even that Helen would die on the sofa - or resting wherever she was - and to avoid her being found this way, drugged by him - he thought of the septic tank as his solution to getting away with this, without Helen and Boris being found .. and then jumped to the idea of Helen's 'departure' note whilst rushing around to the tip to dispose evidence of her duvet or cover - with any incontinence.
And he contradicted himself on that day - car trouble to Doctors. Helen unwell to Solicitor.

I can't imagine Helen ever standing at the window, with Boris in her arms, waving him goodbye. I think this is a huge mistake in Helen's character .. he had already said .. she cooked lunch and ate separately - that is how she would be as a writer .. and would be in true terms in her office when he left to go to the Surgery. Glancing up from her work on making their wedding wonderful - searching for alternative venues - and blowing him a kiss or giving a hug.

 

[pinklilies]

Do we know this?

Was he named in her will?

I see this was discussed in opening. I wonder what he stood to gain?

Apologies, I feel we've moved past this subject now but I should have posted the below quote in my original post.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/live-day-one-murder-trial-12427078

The court has now adjourned for lunch until 2pm. More live updates to follow then.

12:58
Author made a will in 2014, naming Stewart as the beneficiary

The prosecution state that on the event of her death, Stewart would benefit from £1.8million in addition to the value of the main Royston house and the second home in Broadstairs. Helen Bailey made a will in 2014 - she was apparently concerned that Stewart might be financially vulnerable if she died.

She expressly provided that her marriage to Stewart would not automatically revoke her will, as would otherwise have been the case. A Power of Attorney was registered in May 2015, giving control of her affairs in favour of the defendant and her brother John Bailey should she become unfit to administer her own affairs. The defendant twice enquired about this, requesting copes of it in June 2016 when Helen was still regarded as ‘missing’.

 

[mrazda71]

I'm wondering if it is at all possible that, he didn't actually intend to kill Helen. Or the very least not yet, not then.


Came accross this today too ... some people ask why and how I've been single since my divorce. I give you exhibit #356

http://www.shropshirestar.com/news/...ed-wifes-food-with-laxatives-for-three-years/

 

[Alyce]

That`s why I thought from the start that it was important to meet a woman without children.

Yep. No children to contest the Will. No nearby family to call round. Then he leans heavily on the idea of them getting a house in Royston, rather than London, where Helen's pals might visit more often.

 

[Alyce]

I'm wondering if it is at all possible that, he didn't actually intend to kill Helen. Or the very least not yet, not then.


Came accross this today too ... some people ask why and how I've been single since my divorce. I give you exhibit #356

http://www.shropshirestar.com/news/...ed-wifes-food-with-laxatives-for-three-years/

Good Grief !!

 

[Annad]

I see IS as a covertnarcissist. Always the victim. His ill health, widower status, cancer scare,missing partner. He is also a charmer, another word for"manipulator". His ex MIL thinks the world of him and I am sure sodid a lot of other women. I am begging to think like others here that thismurder was not planned. He obviously was gas-lighting HB with the drugs andmaybe killed her unintentionally that day. If you intent to murder then youmight try the drugs once or twice to test the effect but then wait for yourmoment. He was trying to mess with her mind and could have killed heraccidentally and considering he was just out of hospital - the first dumb thingthat pops into his mind is that the cesspit is "a great place to hide a body".This man obviously does not think when stressed. And then he had to murder thelittle dog. I hope HB gets justice.

 

[Joely 123]

Apart from his different story to Doctors' Surgery and to Helens' conveyance Solicitor on reasons for delay or IS acting for Helen ... I wonder if he used 'unwell' as a Freudian slip .. because she was more unwell as a result of his action plan than he anticipated that day. We all know now that he is the person he describes Helen to have been ... agitated, worrier etc. And many coercive partners place their character upon the other. I believe Helen - through writing - was a truly balanced person. Sometimes, questioning of course .. and not willing to tolerate a house of girlfriends staying over if she did not choose this. But she had already written of how she found it hard to live in a house with young men where they ate specially sourced cheese on Mother's Pride bread. She was open about her adjustment to this new way - and when IS said to hide it (the cheese) - she said she wash't going back to life like in a shared home where food was labelled with one's name.

I read her as being so incredibly generous loving and appreciative of how life can regain happiness. And I believe her to be a very trusting person. Her birth sign of 22nd August also underlines her nature of expansion and giving.