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

[mrjitty]

Some understated criticism of the police for not finding the body for 3 months. My personal feeling is that their reticence can be partially explained by the wealth and status of the people involved.

Just on this point though - let's understand the enormity of the task!

IS did not report Helen missing until Friday

So potentially using a vehicle - that means the area for disposal is vast

In other unsophisticated murders I have looked at, the body does not turn up for years even though hiding it just meant dumping it in the woods.

In such cases, patience is rewarded

 

[neteditor]

Yeah - I guess its also possible that no detectable Cadaver odour would be drifting up from a submerged body.

The crust is kind of like an airtight seal.

Not to forget the seal on those lids is designed not to release any odour from the sewage beneath.

 

[wolfcub]

thanks Tiny for the Times on previous thread;


so now we have temper issues ( from Michael Shannon in the Sun ) and a total neurosis about £.

Anybody surprised?


Also, in his conning phase 2011- 2013 he must have paid for some of the dating expenses. With a view to recouping his investment later?
I cannot imagine HB putting up with this hysterical reaction to spending small sums so he must have hid that too.

Well, no wonder he didn't have any friends! And in spite of all the money and perks which fell into his lap anyway, explains why he would have seethed at the cost of a ring if he wouldn't even pay for a cup of tea! Stupid of him not to cover up his tightness, £10 and £3 for crying out loud!!!

 

[Pips]

It's very poisonous though, that puts me off.

Oh, thanks for telling me - the knowledge you get on this site is amazing!

 

[porkypies]

Re IS's sons benefiting from Helen's will.

A photo of that 'temp' will is posted on here some way back, and she herself has mentioned his sons in it.
However, I would think that Mr. Hurley, as sole executor, and under the circumstances, would be able to control how this translates into what they may or may not get.

 

[neteditor]

Oh, thanks for telling me - the knowledge you get on this site is amazing!

I live on a farm, and was brought up on farms, so am somewhat aware of the dangers in plants. Not an expert of course. I would hate to plant something that a wandering buffalo might find tempting. Yes we have buffalo here They are very cute. I digress.

 

[Tortoise]

Helen wrote a lovely piece about how she really wished she could talk over JS' death with him after it happened and get his take on events. I obviously didn't know Helen, but I'm feeling that way now. I'd love to know what she would make of what's gone on, particularly now we can forget the aspects of the trial that would have been mortifying for her. Much as I can't stand Ms Lifecoach she was spot on when she said Helen didn't suffer fools, I can only begin to imagine what her thoughts on IS would be now!

I don't think she really knew Helen very well.

Helen did suffer a fool gladly, and the way he turned up uninvited would have made Helen wince, and then decide to pay no attention to it.

 

[neteditor]

Re IS's sons benefiting from Helen's will.

A photo of that 'temp' will is posted on here some way back, and she herself has mentioned his sons in it.
However, I would think that Mr. Hurley, as sole executor, and under the circumstances, would be able to control how this translates into what they may or may not get.

He might find his hands tied by the forfeiture law. Descendants are not allowed to profit.

 

[mrjitty]

Not to forget the seal on those lids is designed not to release any odour from the sewage beneath.

Yeah

Sometimes these scumbags just get lucky

Many years ago a local country girl was murdered back home. Her dog was found tied to a tree. It was deeply shocking because it was a small sleepy country town.

20 years later I remembered about it and wondered if it was still unsolved

After a bit of digging I discovered it is "unsolved" - in other words they knew who did it from day one but they can't prove it.

The clue was the dog calmly waiting, tied by its lead to the tree

 

[BlueMosaic]

I want him on suicide watch so he doesn´t do an Ariel Castro exit.

Wonder where'll he end up? Presumably he isn't seen as dangerous to other men (as opposed to women, where he clearly is) or at a high risk of escape so will it be Cat A or B (e.g. Bedford) or wherever they'll have him?

 

[KarenUK]

Thanks for the Radio 2 tip, its v interesting - Ben Ando "He's not as clever as he thinks he is". Could he have killed his first wife? Geoffrey Wansall, crime writer - "I can't imagine for a moment she died suddenly of epilepsy in the garden, and of course she's been cremated. He got away with it that time, and thought he could again".

Some understated criticism of the police for not finding the body for 3 months. My personal feeling is that their reticence can be partially explained by the wealth and status of the people involved.

Tomorrows show is going to have a discussion about how IS was allowed to not attend court for the sentencing, with the comment that he should have been made to listen to the judge and face up to what he has done. I'm glad other people see that as cowardly and unacceptable, some times I get a bit caught up in the moment!

 

[DollyDiamond]

Re IS's sons benefiting from Helen's will.

A photo of that 'temp' will is posted on here some way back, and she herself has mentioned his sons in it.
However, I would think that Mr. Hurley, as sole executor, and under the circumstances, would be able to control how this translates into what they may or may not get.

As I've said here before I don't bear IS' sons any ill-will, I feel sorry for them as their father's evil deeds will affect them in myriad different ways for many years to come. I admire Helen's brother John hugely for the compassion he has shown them in court, and in his statement after the verdict. However I feel it would be quite wrong in principle if Jamie and Oliver Stewart were to benefit financial in any way (sorry, couldn't resist), from the fact that their father murdered Helen Bailey.

Surely the monies he has left after receiving back his stake in the family home will be a sufficient nest egg for them anyway? Plus they will presumably be beneficiaries of their grandparents' estates in the not too distant future. Compared to many young people, Jamie and Oliver are coming in for some decent chunks of cash, I don't see why anyone should be overly concerned about their financial position.

 

[Cherwell]

Tomorrows show is going to have a discussion about how IS was allowed to not attend court for the sentencing, woth the comment that he should have been made to listen to the judge and face up to what he has done. I'm glad other people see that as cowardly and unacceptable, some times I get a bit caught up in the moment!

Yes, I'm utterly shocked that he can't be forced to attend. He's not on remand now, he's been convicted. If this is a loophole because he hadn't yet been sentenced, than it's ridiculous. I find it unacceptable.

 

[Tortoise]

As I've said here before I don't bear IS' sons any ill-will, I feel sorry for them as their father's evil deeds will affect them in myriad different ways for many years to come. I admire Helen's brother John hugely for the compassion he has shown them in court, and in his statement after the verdict. However I feel it would be quite wrong in principle if Jamie and Oliver Stewart were to benefit financial in any way (sorry, couldn't resist), from the fact that their father murdered Helen Bailey.

Surely the monies he has left after receiving back his stake in the family home will be a sufficient nest egg for them anyway? Plus they will presumably be beneficiaries of their grandparents' estates in the not too distant future. Compared to many young people, Jamie and Oliver are coming in for some decent chunks of cash, I don't see why anyone should be overly concerned about their financial position.

Totally with you.

They are not even small children.

 

[BlueMosaic]

But he could write to Nick and Joe...!

Oh yes, they might visit .

 

[neteditor]

As I've said here before I don't bear IS' sons any ill-will, I feel sorry for them as their father's evil deeds will affect them in myriad different ways for many years to come. I admire Helen's brother John hugely for the compassion he has shown them in court, and in his statement after the verdict. However I feel it would be quite wrong in principle if Jamie and Oliver Stewart were to benefit financial in any way (sorry, couldn't resist), from the fact that their father murdered Helen Bailey.

Surely the monies he has left after receiving back his stake in the family home will be a sufficient nest egg for them anyway? Plus they will presumably be beneficiaries of their grandparents' estates in the not too distant future. Compared to many young people, Jamie and Oliver are coming in for some decent chunks of cash, I don't see why anyone should be overly concerned about their financial position.

IF he has had any legal aid, the board will claw back every penny. I doubt there will be a dime left for the sons.

 

[Squamous]

I would also imagine that there's nothing to stop any beneficiaries from making any gifts to Jamie or Oliver if they choose to.

I wonder what Hartwell Lodge is worth now? I know Alyce said that murder-scene houses don't always devalue significantly but I would be surprised if this one doesn't. Helen and Boris being hidden there leaves a particularly sad legacy.

That said, I think I'd consider buying it if it was a lower price (well, for me to buy it the price would have to be about £500 but ykwim!). I'd take out the garage and sort the drains, this wasn't the house's fault and I do think good can come out of terrible things.

 

[Cherwell]

As I've said here before I don't bear IS' sons any ill-will, I feel sorry for them as their father's evil deeds will affect them in myriad different ways for many years to come. I admire Helen's brother John hugely for the compassion he has shown them in court, and in his statement after the verdict. However I feel it would be quite wrong in principle if Jamie and Oliver Stewart were to benefit financial in any way (sorry, couldn't resist), from the fact that their father murdered Helen Bailey.

Surely the monies he has left after receiving back his stake in the family home will be a sufficient nest egg for them anyway? Plus they will presumably be beneficiaries of their grandparents' estates in the not too distant future. Compared to many young people, Jamie and Oliver are coming in for some decent chunks of cash, I don't see why anyone should be overly concerned about their financial position.

As someone said earlier, it's none of our business. It will come down to what Helen's family think is right, and they will have more idea of how Helen herself would have felt.

oops sorry, I see you didn't actually mention the will, I misread it.

 

[Tiny]

Hi all,

just caught up! So so pleased that toe rag got 34 years. He is vile and I am disgusted he was given the option of not even appearing on video link. I am sorry but it's unacceptable and for a heinous crime he should have been in court receiving his sentence.
Thanks /so much Alyce and Torts for the updates and all you Sleuthers for all your interesting comments this am.

 

[TheRisenBishop]

Totally with you.

They are not even small children.

Me too, it would set a horrible precedent! No descendant of someone convicted of murder for gain should be able to profit either directly or indirectly. I'm sure they'd be the first to agree too.