GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #3

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Chloe Keedy ‏@ChloeKeedyITV [video=twitter;826444107488845828]https://twitter.com/ChloeKeedyITV/status/826444107488845828[/video]More



Ian Stewart begins to shake and cry in dock as Mr Hurley tells court he didn't believe Stewart when he told him about wedding plans
 
Chloe Keedy ‏@ChloeKeedyITV [video=twitter;826444396199628800]https://twitter.com/ChloeKeedyITV/status/826444396199628800[/video]More



Asked if anyone had ever mentioned names Joe or Nick to him in relation to Helen or her husband's finances, Mr Hurley tells court no
 
She was said to have had assets worth £3,326,316 at the time of her death in April 2016.

This included a property portfolio with an estimated value of £1,850,000 and savings in her own accounts of around £60,000, plus £90,000 in a joint account with Stewart, jurors heard.

Jurors heard that her death left Stewart as the only beneficiary of roughly £235,000 in pensions and he could have received £1.28 million in life insurance, intended to cover inheritance tax.

Stewart, who was out of work due to illness, already received around £2,000 a month in sickness pay and benefits, the court was told.

Simon Russell Flint, defending, asked Ms King-Jones: "If Ms Bailey and Mr Stewart were unmarried, he would have had to pay 40% of any money that he inherited over the amount of £325,000, but if they had married, if they got married on September... he would have inherited everything, inheritance tax-free?"

She replied: "Hypothetically, yes."

http://www.itv.com/news/anglia/2017...-primary-beneficiary-of-her-will-court-hears/
 
i can't work out how to copy Chloe's script - couple of minutes ago IS began to shake and cry in the dock when Mr Hurley said he didn't believe what IS said about their wedding plans.

And I bet he's also cr*pping his pants at the same time as shaking and crying!

TBH I expected today to get to him.
A greedy man sat hearing all the £, triple digit sums whistling by ...... what might have been . :boohoo:
 
Says a great deal that Mr Hurley didn't believe what IS said about the wedding plans. By that time he had got to know him and presumably had unexpressed concerns about him or definitely a mistrust of him.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
[FONT=&amp]15:08[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Witness is cross-examined

Mr Hurley is being cross-examined. He admits he was not told by Ms Bailey that she was getting married to Stewart.
Mr Hurley confirms he told Ms Bailey that she would be saving around £1 million in inheritance tax on her death “by tying the knot.”
He again acknowledges that Ms Bailey did not tell him he was the sole executor of her will and that it was subject to a discretionary trust. But he says it is “not completely uncommon for executors not to be shown wills.”
[/FONT]


http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/helen-bailey-murder-trial-week-12531416
 
This Chloe Keedy is not very accurate, IMO. Treat her reporting with caution.



Beneficiaries, not "benefactors"!



Surely this should be "frightened to touch the capital?
Yes I noticed the second error using the word income when it should clearly be capital - slapdash! V poor show ITV news.
 
Mr Hurley is being cross-examined. He admits he was not told by Ms Bailey that she was getting married to Stewart.

I take it that means that he wasn't told that a date for the wedding had been decided. We've already heard that Helen told him that she intended to marry IS, so this is hardly a point for the defence.
 
Originally Posted by MillyM
Stewart, who was out of work due to illness, already received around £2,000 a month in sickness pay and benefits, the court was told.


http://www.itv.com/news/anglia/2017-...l-court-hears/
Snipped

Lit Up - maybe you can confirm this, when you have time?
We have been told various things today, that the £2k monthly income related to his past company.
The BIB is very different.

That has to be an ill health retirement pension, surely? Can you be off sick for 20 years?
 
"The judge briefly deals with a couple of questions from the jury concerning Helen Bailey’s assets.
He confirms that Stewart would have received the £235,000 pension fund and £1.2million life insurance pay out, separate to the conditions of her will."


I was SO glad to read this bit!
 
I take it that means that he wasn't told that a date for the wedding had been decided. We've already heard that Helen told him that she intended to marry IS, so this is hardly a point for the defence.
Why are the defence splitting hairs over this?
 
Chloe Keedy (@ChloeKeedyITV) tweeted at 2:56 PM on Tue, Jan 31, 2017:
Ian Stewart begins to shake and cry in dock as Mr Hurley tells court he didn't believe Stewart when he told him about wedding plans
I hope the evil, money-grabbing turd spends the rest of his life behind bars shaking and crying!
 
"On her death he would receive those funds. A £1.28 million life insurance policy was taken out by Ms Bailey to cover inheritance tax in the event of her death."

vs
Interested Bystander “I agree the Life Insurance would not go to IS as it would mean that it would have been taxable at 40% as he was the beneficiary. It was purely to pay off IT and would be paid by the estate.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
228
Guests online
1,813
Total visitors
2,041

Forum statistics

Threads
606,745
Messages
18,210,357
Members
233,954
Latest member
pollcat12
Back
Top