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

[pinklilies]

"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!

But he could never have received it as she was always to remain missing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Interested Bystander]

"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

Not the best way to do it but maybe it makes no difference in the end. We inherited money from a childless rich cousin whose wife had predeceased him (I hasten to add not as much as IS stood to inherit) but our relative had some sort of insurance (I think) that meant none of us 8 legatees lost a penny due to Inheritance Tax.

 

[cottonweaver]

It doesn't sound right to me that he was receiving £24k PA in benefits!

IDK anything about these things but am googling about PIP, which is the new DLA.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/b...efore-claiming/how-much-you-get-and-how-long/

and extras?
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/b...fore-claiming/extra-help-pip-entitles-you-to/
.............. still doesn't get you to almost 2k a month though

sloppy reporting again?

 

[icemaiden65]

Why are the defence splitting hairs over this?

Possibly trying to show that Helen wasn't as close to the witness after all?

 

[Cherwell]

But he could never have received it as she was always to remain missing.

No, but the point is that the inheritance tax issue is a red herring.

If he had married Helen, the tax on his inheritance would not have been payable. That would give him an incentive to marry her.
So the defence are trying to show that he has no financial motive for killing her before they married.
But the insurance policy cancels that out.

 

[cottonweaver]

Possibly trying to show that Helen wasn't as close to the witness after all?

agree. and of all the witnesses, Hurley was the one to really sum up all Helen's positive attributes. Clearly he admired and respected her a great deal.

 

[Florrie]

It doesn't sound right to me that he was receiving £24k PA in benefits!

He won't have been getting anything like that in benefits alone. Likelihood is that he had a pension and other payments coming in on top. Even top rate PIP wouldn't give him that income per month.

I am leaning towards him killing Helen unplanned that day and everything he did afterwards was done in a panic. Still very telling that he chose to shove her body in the cesspit though. To me this speaks of him not only resenting Helen but actively despising her.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[icemaiden65]

But he could never have received it as she was always to remain missing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think it was more important in the context that it highlights how much IS ASSUMED he would get his greedy paws on - and it also shows that the jury were on the ball. Visions of them over lunch doing a lot of eye rolling, :thinking: hence asking for clarification on their return into court!

 

[Cherwell]

"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...-primary-beneficiary-of-her-will-court-hears/

ITV probably got this wrong too.

 

[Legally Bland]

IDK anything about these things but am googling about PIP, which is the new DLA.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/b...efore-claiming/how-much-you-get-and-how-long/

and extras?
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/b...fore-claiming/extra-help-pip-entitles-you-to/
.............. still doesn't get you to almost 2k a month though

sloppy reporting again?

It's the "sickness pay" bit which has me confused. That would suggest he was still technically employed, but I can't see that being right.

ETA: I'm sure it's probably sloppy reporting as others have pointed out.

 

[MillyM]

£600 he was getting from HB, work pension, PIP, sickness benefit...er, what would that come to?

 

[MillyM]

It's the "sickness pay" bit which has me confused. That would suggest he was still technically employed, but I can't see that being right.

Maybe they mean like a Government benefit? Unable to work due to incapacity.

 

[ColourPurple]

Why are the defence splitting hairs over this?

I think they're trying to say why would he kill her for her money when he only had to wait a few months till September when he'd get everything without having to pay inheritance tax. They keep leaving out that the life insurance would have covered the inheritance tax so there was no financial advantage in waiting until they were married.

 

[pinklilies]

No, but the point is that the inheritance tax issue is a red herring.

If he had married Helen, the tax on his inheritance would not have been payable. That would give him an incentive to marry her.
So the defence are trying to show that he has no financial motive for killing her before they married.
But the insurance policy cancels that out.

Ah, thanks, yea, got it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ColourPurple]

I think they're trying to say why would he kill her for her money when he only had to wait a few months till September when he'd get everything without having to pay inheritance tax. They keep leaving out that the life insurance would have covered the inheritance tax so there was no financial advantage in waiting until they were married.

Quoting myself lol.

Just realised as IS had no way of knowing Helen would die first their argument only works if you accept that IS was always going to kill Helen to ensure she died first. What they're actually saying is "If he was going to kill her for money why not wait till they were married first?"

Of course the same applies about the insurance policy covering inheritance tax anyway

 

[Joely 123]

Why are the defence splitting hairs over this?

Perhaps to undermine Tony Hurley's close communications with Helen.

 

[snoopydog]

IDK anything about these things but am googling about PIP, which is the new DLA.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/b...efore-claiming/how-much-you-get-and-how-long/

and extras?
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/b...fore-claiming/extra-help-pip-entitles-you-to/
.............. still doesn't get you to almost 2k a month though

sloppy reporting again?

Yes. There's no way he was getting that in benefits. It's possible they mean sick pay as a benefit from wherever it was he was employed. Plus he would only be eligible for any non means tested benefits....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ColourPurple]

Perhaps to undermine Tony Hurley's close communications with Helen.

Could be, though that would work better if everybody else knew about the wedding and invites had been sent but they hadn't even got a firm date for it yet.

 

[ColourPurple]

Yes. There's no way he was getting that in benefits. It's possible they mean sick pay as a benefit from wherever it was he was employed. Plus he would only be eligible for any non means tested benefits....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Somebody mentioned he might be getting a widowers pension type payment that would stop if he married Helen. Don't know anything about the rules of that though to see if it's feasible.

 

[snoopydog]

Somebody mentioned he might be getting a widowers pension type payment that would stop if he married Helen. Don't know anything about the rules of that though to see if it's feasible.

Yes that's possible. It was me who said it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk