GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #5

[Squamous]

I'm sure he'll have plenty of new fiction which has nothing to do with any facts too. I think he'll be wittering for a day or two yet, surely?

 

[mrjitty]

I think he came back so that IS had verbal confirmation that they had Helen and Boris (in case people weren't following his story and needed this point hammered home)

This was his stupidest scripting mistake.

He should have maintained the note was real but implied the duo forced Helen to write it.

 

[hunkerdown]

Good spot Snoopy. I particularly like the way Nick not only came back to explain the plot but to verbally confirm he had the correct contact details for IS. No wonder he didn't want to hand over his phone to police later!


I meant to say earlier that I agree that IS infantilised his sons to use them as pawns in his game with Helen. I'm sure some teenagers would be shattered by the death of their mother but O and J were clearly emotionally well enough to go to university, have hobbies and start careers - I'm not saying they weren't devastated, I'm sure they were, but they did seem to cope OK. I think IS took advantage of Helen not being a parent in exaggerating the emotional needs of "the boys" and making her feel that it would be unkind to deprive them of a home with their dad, thus getting her to leave London. In that Life After London piece she said that soon after moving it became apparent that the sons were quite independent and that they would have been fine to share a flat together. I'm sure that had actually been the case for years.

The last time I saw Helen (Nov 15) I asked 'how's it going' meaning how was it now they were all living together - she said it was like 'Men Behaving Badly' living with IS and his sons, OS trailing his girlfriend and her friends in and out, used curry containers left in bedrooms etc


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DollyDiamond]

Good spot Snoopy. I particularly like the way Nick not only came back to explain the plot but to verbally confirm he had the correct contact details for IS. No wonder he didn't want to hand over his phone to police later!


I meant to say earlier that I agree that IS infantilised his sons to use them as pawns in his game with Helen. I'm sure some teenagers would be shattered by the death of their mother but O and J were clearly emotionally well enough to go to university, have hobbies and start careers - I'm not saying they weren't devastated, I'm sure they were, but they did seem to cope OK. I think IS took advantage of Helen not being a parent in exaggerating the emotional needs of "the boys" and making her feel that it would be unkind to deprive them of a home with their dad, thus getting her to leave London. In that Life After London piece she said that soon after moving it became apparent that the sons were quite independent and that they would have been fine to share a flat together. I'm sure that had actually been the case for years.

Spot on - I cannot imagine any 18 year old who would choose to live with Dad and soon-to-be Stepmum if there was an offer of a flat and independence on the table! I have always thought it was IS who pushed for them to come and live with him and Helen (and in his words today 'choose a bedroom each,' as if they are 10 year olds). Strikes me those adult sons were being manipulated by him, along with anyone else he wanted something from. That's the MO of narcissists - they don't have relationships, they take hostages.

 

[Interested Bystander]

So what we all thinking for tomorrow , ie. when will Pros QC kick off?

The afternoon? Whilst he's "covered" the charges, he's loving his moment in the lights AND he's really only got to April 12th.

He'll want to be rattling on for hours more under QC Flint

he'll want to cover, for jury's sake:
13th - why 2nd trip to Royston Household Waste Site*cctv
16th - reason for trip to Broadstairs and his BS throwing himself off the cliffs
18th & 19th, 20th - explain the texts eg. " ‘Ive respected your wishes long enough, you’ve had enough space, let me know you’re ok. Xxxx’" and "A text says ‘contact police, they won’t even tell me where you are if you don’t want to. They can stop all the fuss.’ " and " I need you back. You promised me more. I love you whatever'

20th April the bizarre calls to Cotter and Hurley which do not fit his new defence
22nd April - video interview and all the comments within which no longer fit.
Why he'd do stuff like go to snooker champs and palma if his fiance was kidnapped


I could go on and on, there's so much before we even get into the cross ex potential .

I think way back he realised his initial story would not wash with the police and he then chose to invent other parties to Helen's demise. Hence the late appearance of Nick and Joe.

I hope he is sitting in his cell sweating bricks when he realises what utter balderdash he has spewed today. Or maybe, being deluded, he thinks he has "done a good job".

 

[BatFace]

I'm also quite surprised at his relatively detailed descriptions of Laurel and Hardy, given that pretty much all he could remember about Helen with any certainty when phoning in his Missing Person report was that she was slim. And why did he make the report at all, if he was supposed to be keeping quiet and awaiting further instructions? Why not confess the dastardly threats to Helen's life to her worried brother at that point, if he had given up doing what the evil duo were telling him?

 

[mrjitty]

I agree. He also had no need to mention that at all, I think it's like his grinning under police interview, he just can't keep in how pleased he is to have done what he did.

Agree.

He would have been far better not to take the stand.

This is the most absurd evidence I think I ever heard in a murder trial.

 

[cottonweaver]

This was his stupidest scripting mistake.

He should have maintained the note was real but implied the duo forced Helen to write it.

Yes he definitely hasn't been reading here. That was in the p1ss- take scenario I cobbled together here on Monday.

He's had months to write this guff. Must try harder

 

[Ironside]

Agree.

He would have been far better not to take the stand.

This is the most absurd evidence I think I ever heard in a murder trial.

As Big Bean is the only person alive that seems to have met Jose and Nicklaus he simply had to take the stand as nobody else can verify their evil existence. It's hugely risky but his defence team probably thought it was the only chance Big Bean had of getting off.

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

 

[Florrie]

I will bet anything that the defence advised him against taking the stand. Or maybe they had no option given his late introduction of Jose and Nico.

They know he is guilty I am sure of it and I suspect are going to do just enough to ensure he gets his fair trial but no more.

What he came out with today is sheer lunacy, even the defence must realise that. Would love to be a fly on the wall when the jurors are discussing the case.

I will bet they have to spend very little time deliberating....maybe enough to show they have properly considered the evidence. But then they will find him guilty of all charges.





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[BatFace]

Anybody else looking forward to the judge eviscerating IS before he sends him to the clink forever?

 

[snoopydog]

I would also like to know from IS why he is telling this story now. If these men did exist surely revealing them would put his family in danger?

There's also a huge missing element of why these men would kill Helen for some business paperwork. The house wasn't ransacked and even if they didn't get what they were looking for this isn't any reason to kill her. It's so stupid.

Him taking empty boxes to the tip, most people crush boxes flat first so I don't believe they were empty

There's just no way kidnappers would take the dog either.

I'm not sure why I'm trying to figure out things that don't add up, none of it does but I can't help myself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cottonweaver]

I will bet anything that the defence advised him against taking the stand. Or maybe they had no option given his late introduction of Jose and Nico.

They know he is guilty I am sure of it and I suspect are going to do just enough to ensure he gets his fair trial but no more.

What he came out with today is sheer lunacy, even the defence must realise that. Would love to be a fly on the wall when the jurors are discussing the case.

I will bet they have to spend very little time deliberating....maybe enough to show they have properly considered the evidence. But then they will find him guilty of all charges.

I hope the jury aren't driven to drink like we've been.

I assume that juror with the terminally ill relative is still in place. Imagine how s/he views all this , with her loved one nearing death.

 

[snoopydog]

Also still perplexed at why he's saying the pics in Tesco aren't them. Seems to be quite a trivial denial so far...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Squamous]

He could have at least brought in NiJo for the standing order change rather than blathering on about a spare room costing £4000 a month to decorate!

 

[snoopydog]

He could have at least brought in NiJo for the standing order change rather than blathering on about a spare room costing £4000 a month to decorate!

Yeah and why would nick and joe kill her but pretend they'd just kidnapped her? He's not even said they wanted ransom or anything. He's a tool


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Duchy]

12:53
"Helen had a phobia of sewage"

“It was £120 a year to get rid of your sewage.

“We had it emptied every year. Helen had a major sewage problem in her house in Highgate.

“There ended up being sewage right outside her back door. Helen had a phobia of sewage.”

Oh my God!

 

[Milenalee]

Also still perplexed at why he's saying the pics in Tesco aren't them. Seems to be quite a trivial denial so far...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe he's holding something heavy. Carrying the groceries, etc.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[snoopydog]

Maybe he's holding something heavy. Carrying the groceries, etc.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ah ha! Yes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[neteditor]

I would also like to know from IS why he is telling this story now. If these men did exist surely revealing them would put his family in danger?

There's also a huge missing element of why these men would kill Helen for some business paperwork. The house wasn't ransacked and even if they didn't get what they were looking for this isn't any reason to kill her. It's so stupid.

Him taking empty boxes to the tip, most people crush boxes flat first so I don't believe they were empty

There's just no way kidnappers would take the dog either.

I'm not sure why I'm trying to figure out things that don't add up, none of it does but I can't help myself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree, that was my first thought on that too. But he has to say they were empty because he can't lift a dinner tray. Wonder what was in them that he might need to hide too. The articles of Helen's she *might* have taken if she'd left home?