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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just thought I would paste up Tara's tweet, posted by her about one hour ago
The Court Serve timing says 11am for the sentencing, but best to keep a watch from now, just in case it's earlier


Tara Cox‏@TaraCoxCN 1h1 hour ago

Ian Stewart, yesterday found guilty of murdering his bride-to-be Helen Bailey, will be sentenced this morning:
 
Really? said:
Morning all.........I loved how fast the videos came out yesterday after the verdict was announced.........he's no Oscar winner is he?
Click to expand...

Indeed! I'm surprised that so many news outlets went with him apparently showing the astonishment of being caught out. I think he's quite clearly doing his best impression of what he thinks an innocent man would say if arrested for murder (and makes a terrible job of it!).

Do we know why the garage doors were actually open?!
 
Squamous said:
Indeed! I'm surprised that so many news outlets went with him apparently showing the astonishment of being caught out. I think he's quite clearly doing his best impression of what he thinks an innocent man would say if arrested for murder (and makes a terrible job of it!).

Do we know why the garage doors were actually open?!
Click to expand...

I'm guessing the police opened it as they may have had a property search warrant along with an arrest warrant......haha.....freaked him out ! " have you found Helen?"
 
Squamous said:
Indeed! I'm surprised that so many news outlets went with him apparently showing the astonishment of being caught out. I think he's quite clearly doing his best impression of what he thinks an innocent man would say if arrested for murder (and makes a terrible job of it!).

Do we know why the garage doors were actually open?!
Click to expand...

BIB left them open intentionally, overnight would be my guess. No-one had yet changed out of their nightwear, IIRC was 7am on the body cam footage. Policeman said " nothing to do with us" when he was asked who had opened them, twice.
 
Really? said:
I'm guessing the police opened it as they may have had a property search warrant along with an arrest warrant......haha.....freaked him out ! " have you found Helen?"
Click to expand...

They do mention the warrant before his arrest so maybe they were cracking on. It sounds like it may have been a brilliant co-incidence. I don't think they expected to find Helen's body when they did.
 
Morning all. I'm really going to enjoy Judge Bright's sentencing remarks today indelibly placing on record the vile, self-serving, predatory behaviour of this animal.

I'm sure he'll have plenty of kind words for the absolute dignity with which Helen's family have held themselves in such awful, awful circumstances.

The difference between the very best of humanity and the absolute worst has been striking throughout this trial and IS did his best to pervert and subvert this reality and I don't see Judge Bright missing the opportunity to right this terrible wrong.
 
Morning all!

Just reading through the overnight posts and just wanted to mention about the will as it was mentioned in the last thread that the sons probably wouldn't be able to get anything in the will.

The sons will not stand to inherit everything, though it is possible the sons may still be beneficiaries. As it's a discretionary will, the decision towards the beneficiaries will be entirely in the hands of Tony Hurley.

IS will not be able to receive anything, obviously, but (especially) if Helen had left mention of the boys being provided for, it may well be that this is honoured - I would imagine Tony would consult Helen's mother and brother with regards to the beneficiaries. I feel almost certain that they would wish to (without also trying to be presumptuous!) see the sons have something - especially as one of the sons was, though an adult, still living at home. Knowing the little I do about the family, I don't think they would want to see any harm or direct loss to the boys as a result of what has happened. But that is just my read of the situation and their characters and opinion only.

As I say; it will be entirely down to Tony Hurley as the executor, but I feel certain it would be executed alongside discussion with Helen's relatives.
 
This all feels so awful after the brief release of the verdict, hearing these back stories. Her poor parents. I know I'm one of many who joined this forum after lurking for two or three weeks. I couldn't understand why, despite having more than enough in my life, this particular case seemed to have got in my head, constantly replaying and imagining a better ending, not believing what really happened. Yes I live near Cambridge, so it's been covered, and I have lived in the "Ham and High" area in London in my early working life, but that's not it.

It was such a revelation to find that so many other people, whether or not they actually knew Helen personally or through her works, felt the same. I know it's not quite goodbye yet-we have the sentence and April 11th (how will we do that?) but thanks for being so kind, clever and funny-all the things (and more) that Helen was and should still be. When was/is Helen's birthday?
 
Squamous said:
That interview where he keeps forgetting his story too!! "I loaded my car...no, Helen loaded my car". His head is clearly all over the place ;)
Click to expand...

Where are the interviews? The only ones I've seen he isn't talking in them and they're really short


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Cherwell said:
Worth watching - embedded in that Daily Mail article is an interview with the CPS chief prosecutor. It's in two parts.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4251248/Narcissist-liar-obsessed-millions.html#ixzz4ZUrvMSKZ
Click to expand...

Thank you for that Cherwell, yes very interesting. He seemed to have the measure of IS didn't he? Especially that comment "I doubt he experiences any real deep emotions."

More or less saying he is a psychopath.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
LozDa said:
Morning all!

Just reading through the overnight posts and just wanted to mention about the will as it was mentioned in the last thread that the sons probably wouldn't be able to get anything in the will.

The sons will not stand to inherit everything, though it is possible the sons may still be beneficiaries. As it's a discretionary will, the decision towards the beneficiaries will be entirely in the hands of Tony Hurley.

IS will not be able to receive anything, obviously, but (especially) if Helen had left mention of the boys being provided for, it may well be that this is honoured - I would imagine Tony would consult Helen's mother and brother with regards to the beneficiaries. I feel almost certain that they would wish to (without also trying to be presumptuous!) see the sons have something - especially as one of the sons was, though an adult, still living at home. Knowing the little I do about the family, I don't think they would want to see any harm or direct loss to the boys as a result of what has happened. But that is just my read of the situation and their characters and opinion only.

As I say; it will be entirely down to Tony Hurley as the executor, but I feel certain it would be executed alongside discussion with Helen's relatives.
Click to expand...

From my experience, notwithstanding any possible legal challenges to the discretionary trust as administered by Tony Hurley, those beneficiaries inheriting under such circumstances (Jamie and Oliver) would be highly reluctant to take anything at all.

Irrespective of the legalities and Hurley's powers as a trustee, their Father preyed upon Helen and engineered the setting up of the trust for his own nefarious reasons. Morally, because of how he acted, their relationship was/is null and void and so too should be any inheritance due to his sons.

I might be wrong but I cannot see the sons being comfortable with inheriting under such circumstances.
 
BlueMosaic said:
This all feels so awful after the brief release of the verdict, hearing these back stories. Her poor parents. I know I'm one of many who joined this forum after lurking for two or three weeks. I couldn't understand why, despite having more than enough in my life, this particular case seemed to have got in my head, constantly replaying and imagining a better ending, not believing what really happened. Yes I live near Cambridge, so it's been covered, and I have lived in the "Ham and High" area in London in my early working life, but that's not it.

It was such a revelation to find that so many other people, whether or not they actually knew Helen personally or through her works, felt the same. I know it's not quite goodbye yet-we have the sentence and April 11th (how will we do that?) but thanks for being so kind, clever and funny-all the things (and more) that Helen was and should still be. When was/is Helen's birthday?
Click to expand...


Morning Blue Mosaic

Helen's birthday is August 22
 
BlueMosaic said:
I know it's not quite goodbye yet-we have the sentence and April 11th (how will we do that?) but thanks for being so kind, clever and funny-all the things (and more) that Helen was and should still be. When was/is Helen's birthday?
Click to expand...

August 22nd I believe. I think I know that better than IS did!

I have to smile at the prosecutor saying that IS will not benefit financially "in any way" from Helen's death. He has a very good level of insight into IS' character and the lies upon lies he told, including the things he said about Helen bring a very nervy person which was in there right from the 101 call. Helen was honest about her anxieties but IS obviously wanted to draw on that. I remembered today about him even mentioning Helen's dad's health in that call too.
 
TheRisenBishop said:
From my experience, notwithstanding any possible legal challenges to the discretionary trust as administered by Tony Hurley, those beneficiaries inheriting under such circumstances (Jamie and Oliver) would be highly reluctant to take anything at all.

Irrespective of the legalities and Hurley's powers as a trustee, their Father preyed upon Helen and engineered the setting up of the trust for his own nefarious reasons. Morally, because of how he acted, their relationship was/is null and void and so to should be any inheritance due to his sons.

I might be wrong but I cannot see the sons being comfortable with inheriting under such circumstances.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. But I was more talking about the legalities of the fact that they can, in fact, still be beneficiaries - as it was suggested they couldn't be in the previous thread.

They can still be named beneficiaries, even if they refuse and it goes to a contingent. That side of things, I can't predict or suggest how it will go - and I wouldn't want to.

In my opinion, and from what I've seen and heard from JB, it wouldn't surprise me at all if the boys were named as beneficiaries. What happens from that point on is between them...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 126 more.
Total: 608 (members: 127, guests: 481)

Online statistics

Members online
127
Guests online
481
Total visitors
608
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,340
Messages
18,237,929
Members
234,346
Latest member
slee
Back
Top