GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #8

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
BRICKET ROAD ST ALBANS
I bet he is.

NOT BEFORE 02:00 pm
Plea and Trial Preparation
what will this be Alyce?


Different hearings - nothing to do with IS - I just blanked out the names - but they show as being heard by Judge Bright, so I guess he has to finish IS a bit early in order to fit in the other folk

Which is why I guess he has said he will not finish summing up until Monday - and send the Jury out at lunchtime.

edited to quote Judge Bright's words, rather than mine
 
I am baffled by how the Defence gets to state blatant untruths as evidence.
 
Thank you Cotton W - for your transcript. It is good for everyone to see it in one place - and as the Jury heard it.
 
There was no massive expenditure or change to spending patterns after her death'
“Are there sudden massive withdrawals of money from the joint account after Helen’s death? No.
“There is no different pattern of spending, no personal amounts removed, no transfers of money to his account.



Another bit of the Defence closing which is cleverly worded ( am trying to be polite here )

Of course there was no sudden extra expenditure. Almost before he could think about what to do with extra money, the police were round the house, checking and searching for Helen. He might not be a very clever IT person, but he's not that stupid that he would go off and spend, spend, spend when he's in the spotlight.

Anyway, as Defence said, he did have money in the bank...this increase to £4K was just to stockpile more funds while he was waiting out the 7 year limit before he could declare Helen dead and get his hands on the lot.
 
Ah well, I couldn't help myself. I had to email The Strimmer.

It was always said that the Tortoise would win the race - it is there in our fable (of wisdom).
And you Did it - Tortoise, living up to your chosen name.
 
Massive thanks from me CW for the paste job. Nice work makes it much easier to follow.
 
It was always said that the Tortoise would win the race - it is there in our fable (of wisdom).
And you Did it - Tortoise, living up to your chosen name.

I'd love it if the judge/Prosecutor corrected the book dedication tomorrow, after getting T's email.
 
Yes I've only noticed her with bare feet in her indoor photos.

This would be so dreadful to think that Helen didn't wear shoes at Hartwell to satiate IS's 'choices' - and yet she felt, sadly, sometimes that she had to adjust to living in an 'all male home' of sweaty trainers, curry takeaways and no regard for her Artisan cheese. Dear little love - surely the feisty Helen would tell HIM to take a walk!!
 
Please can somebody explain why the Defence is allowed to tell lies? That was so misleading!
 
I just want to say I found it terrible that IS somewhere replied when asked why he didn't tell anyone about the kidnappers that by then helen was dead anyway or something equally as dismissive. He never seems bothered she's dead. There's no defence evidence of his shock and horror or wanting justice for her at any costs...
 
Massive thanks from me CW for the paste job. Nice work makes it much easier to follow.

I've got Flint's stuff on same page didn't paste it as was trying to cheer everyone up- but if you want it - I'll paste it on. ( Only takes a few mins, up to you- members' blood pressure )
 
And some people just like having money. Money for money's sake, misers do this. There's never enough...
 
There was no massive expenditure or change to spending patterns after her death'
“Are there sudden massive withdrawals of money from the joint account after Helen’s death? No.
“There is no different pattern of spending, no personal amounts removed, no transfers of money to his account.



Another bit of the Defence closing which is cleverly worded ( am trying to be polite here )

Of course there was no sudden extra expenditure. Almost before he could think about what to do with extra money, the police were round the house, checking and searching for Helen. He might not be a very clever IT person, but he's not that stupid that he would go off and spend, spend, spend when he's in the spotlight.

Anyway, as Defence said, he did have money in the bank...this increase to £4K was just to stockpile more funds while he was waiting out the 7 year limit before he could declare Helen dead and get his hands on the lot.

IMO he was going to siphon off all her book income as and when it came in until, as you say, he could take the lot.
 
I've got Flint's stuff on same page didn't paste it as was trying to cheer everyone up- but if you want it - I'll paste it on. ( Only takes a few mins, up to you- members' blood pressure )

Probably better to wait until he's finished, so it will all be closer together.
 
I'd love it if the judge/Prosecutor corrected the book dedication tomorrow, after getting T's email.
:thinking:

:noooo:

I didn't tell him about the book dedication. :hiding:

Only the bit about Stewart not standing to be a million pounds richer after they married, according to Tony Hurley.
 
IMO he was going to siphon off all her book income as and when it came in until, as you say, he could take the lot.

Yup, I agree plus .... Pure speculation on my part but I think he fancied himself as a writer, I think Helen made it look so easy (as talented people often do) made a load of dosh from it, got loads of attention, and remember he said when they were first in contact words to the effect of 'i'm talking with an author!' With Helen gone he could slip into her shoes and cream off her audience.

I think part of him getting 'rid' of Helen was she had to go so he could attain his goal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
110
Guests online
1,756
Total visitors
1,866

Forum statistics

Threads
599,579
Messages
18,097,051
Members
230,887
Latest member
DeeDee214
Back
Top