GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #6

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.

tlcya

mother daughter sister wife friend paralegal
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
43,414
Reaction score
77,172
The defendant wiped his eyes as he listened to a recording of himself being interviewed by detectives, following his arrest in April.

As he was asked about the note millionaire children's author, Mrs Bailey allegedly left before her disappearance, Stewart was heard telling officers: "The note was handwriting, it wasn't typed. I thought it was Helen's.

"And she signed the note, no one else would have signed it like that. LB is a nickname I had for Helen, my nickname is BB. It's going back to when we first met. She was little bean and I was big bean."

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/26672...999-calls-reporting-childrens-author-missing/


The fiance of children's author Helen Bailey "grinned" at police officers as they attempted to question him about her sudden disappearance, a court has heard.

Ian Stewart, 56, of Royston, Hertfordshire, is accused of drugging and killing the Electra Brown writer in a financially motivated plot last year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...er-trial-authors-fiance-grinned-police-tried/

Sgt Nicole Goodyear told the court Mr Stewart followed police "everywhere" during a search on 15 April.

She said: "He was very interested in what we were doing, he wanted to know what we were doing and why."

Mr Stewart also denies preventing a lawful burial, fraud and three counts of perverting the course of justice.

The trial continues.


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-38692970

attachment.php


UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016
Thread #2

Thread #3
Thread #4
Thread #5


Please continue discussing here.
 
Chloe Keedy ‏@ChloeKeedyITV 6m6 minutes ago

Trimmer asks Stewart why he never mentioned that Helen had taken zopiclone herself in his defence statement to the crown .
is that something you've just remembered?'
Trimmer tells court Stewart knew then what he was being accused of (drugging Helen)
 
As this is a new thread, I thought I would sum up IS's evidence so far, in case you've been wayward:

:liar:
 
Just following on from the previous thread, a murder of a single adult cannot justify a whole life tariff under U.K. law, as I understand it. It might justify a 30 year minimum sentence which would effectively be the same thing in this case though.
 
If this wasn't such a sad case, it would be pure comedy gold!!

Btw, you guys are such a bad influence, stopped my assignment for a coffee break, accidentally picked up my kindle and all the smart wit had me reading til the end... pfft
 
@ Dolly Just c/p ing this bit of your reply (#1426) as it seems so appropriate. We all want this :


But I feel in the name of justice and for the sake of Helen, her loved ones and all decent people who are disgusted by what he has done, he needs to be put under pressure and cornered like a rat in a trap, and we are counting on Mr Trimmer to do just that.
 
Trimmer: “Helen’s disappearance was a murder, she hadn’t killed herself.

Stewart: “Yes”.

Trimmer: “You didn’t come home one day angry and killed her?”

Stewart: “No”


Aaagh .... First have him admit that this was no suicide. Then crime of passion at the spur of an unnamed moment is out.
Prosecutor is moving towards planning and premeditation, as they should.

Trimming loose ends. It's like peeling an apple and getting to the core.
 
Just following on from the previous thread, a murder of a single adult cannot justify a whole life tariff under U.K. law, as I understand it. It might justify a 30 year minimum sentence which would effectively be the same thing in this case though.

Thanks, Squamous. That was me suggesting he should get whole life. I am not familiar with sentencing but have now read that it is usually multiple murders that ensures a whole life tariff. So I have fingers crossed for a 30 year minimum.
 
I believe it's the first time that I've commented on the Trial threads although I followed Helen's case when she was missing.

I've just heard on the news about 'two sinister men' and I am infuriated. So afraid that justice won't be done here!
 
phil-mitchell-angry-4.jpg

“Let’s deal with this head on, you are a liar"
 
IB from previous thread:

"Any guesses as to how long the jury will take to find IS guilty? I can see them taking their seats and collectively giving a huge sigh of relief!
I have only followed one other trial which did not have a jury so I am a bit clueless as to the final step in the prosecution. No doubt they will have to discuss the case but surely there cannot be a jury member that would buy his story and argue in favour of him. Are we talking a few hours?
"

They will probably come back after a couple of hours. I'm sure they could come back with a verdict after five minutes, but they have to put on a bit of a show of discussing it, otherwise it could give grounds for appeal.

So by the time they've all used the toilet facilities, and had some coffee and possibly a few sandwiches, and had a good laugh (mingled of course with anger and sadness) I should think we're looking at two hours max.
 
14:07
Case is to resume shortly

The case has been called back on. We are waiting for jurors and the judge. Stewart is again sat in the witness box.
 
I believe it's the first time that I've commented on the Trial threads although I followed Helen's case when she was missing.

I've just heard on the news about 'two sinister men' and I am infuriated. So afraid that justice won't be done here!

I don't think there's any real chance of justice not being done. There is no evidence at all of the two sinister men existing (three if we include Dave), or of any of the things they are supposed to have done. Also, they were not mentioned until December. Fear not.
 
Just following on from the previous thread, a murder of a single adult cannot justify a whole life tariff under U.K. law, as I understand it. It might justify a 30 year minimum sentence which would effectively be the same thing in this case though.

A single adult .... :thinking:
 
I believe it's the first time that I've commented on the Trial threads although I followed Helen's case when she was missing.

I've just heard on the news about 'two sinister men' and I am infuriated. So afraid that justice won't be done here!
Dont be afraid. This is a dead cert guilty verdict.
 
I believe it's the first time that I've commented on the Trial threads although I followed Helen's case when she was missing.

I've just heard on the news about 'two sinister men' and I am infuriated. So afraid that justice won't be done here!

Have you read right through the threads?

Welcome by the way :)

In terms of what the prosecution case has been his defence is laughable. It's so convoluted he won't be able to recall key elements under cross examination. He's going to look very very foolish.

Unless the jury are utterly stupid there is no way he is getting away with this. Justice will be done.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I believe it's the first time that I've commented on the Trial threads although I followed Helen's case when she was missing.

I've just heard on the news about 'two sinister men' and I am infuriated. So afraid that justice won't be done here!

You surely can't think that anybody is believing all that tripe?
 
There's a good explanation of the criteria in the sentencing of Jamie Reynolds (who only committed a single murder, age 23 so was an unusual contender for a whole life tariff).

http://olsc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/R-V-Jaime-Reynolds.pdf

Thanks, Squamous, I've read through this quickly (hideous details, hard reading) but he did get a whole life tariff, didn't he? This and other crimes carefully planned and disgusting details being part of the reason? Judge discounted guilty plea as at all mitigating in that case.
 
I believe it's the first time that I've commented on the Trial threads although I followed Helen's case when she was missing.

I've just heard on the news about 'two sinister men' and I am infuriated. So afraid that justice won't be done here!

Welcome to the Forum! Please don't be afraid. His goose is well and truly cooked. Unless the jury has a gaggle of sociopaths lurking in their midst who might find it a jolly wheeze to let him off (Birds of feather and all that...) He won't taste freedom again.

He's entitled to spout any old defense he wants but his is bordering on contempt of court! Putting victims, professionals and the judicial system through this farce is contemptible in itself. His sentence will reflect this of that I have no doubt. Especially if pure greed is taken as his primary motive. Courts don't like that one bit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
166
Guests online
1,765
Total visitors
1,931

Forum statistics

Threads
601,878
Messages
18,131,227
Members
231,172
Latest member
DownlowDelivery
Back
Top